User talk:Dr.K./Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

Hey Dr. K

Wish we would be with you this summer. Maybe next year! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.245.236.58 (talk) 21:25, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Keep the faith. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 21:38, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Lemmings

I have the urge to behave like a lemming and jump off the nearest peak. Apparently Ypsilantis was from Istanbul. He personally may never heard that name used since Constantinople was officially and globally known as Constantinople up till the late 1920s. But ... this is Wikipedia and reprogramming history is in Wikipedia's job description. Goodbye cruel world. Where is that darn peak. The land is so flat around here.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 00:16, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

That's funny. :) Anyway, I checked the Alex Ypsilantis (1792-1828) article and it mentions Constantinople in the text, although the new category mentions Istanbul. Seems strange. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 05:01, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Turkey Article

Dear Dr.K, I appreciate the assumption of good faith in my edit, however I have given all reasons why the current state of that paragraph is unacceptable in the talk page and waited very long for objections, and have not received any yet. This paragraph has always had a lot of objections when it was first introduced, it can be seen just by looking through the history. The reverters do not take my discussion into consideration and seem to prefer not to handle things verbally. I'm relatively new to Wikipedia, could you please explain what else I can do to proceed with this edit in a friendly manner? Thank you, EthemD (talk) 18:32, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you EthemD for your kind message. I will reply as soon as time allows. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 18:43, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I can see your point EthemD and since I don't currently have the time to participate in the discussion on the talkpage I will self revert for the time being due to the fact that you made some good points. I may not agree with all of them but since you took the trouble to discuss them in the talk page and you also informed me of your ideas, I will self revert and when I have the time to participate further we may reach some consensus. I would also advise you to participate in the talk page to see if you can reach any consensus with the others as well. I'll try to join as soon as I can but I can't promise a specific time. Thanks again. It was nice meeting you. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 02:23, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your understanding and time, Dr. K. I will indeed continue to try to reach a consensus about this topic in the talk page and am looking forward to seeing you there as well, if time allows. It was nice meeting you too, take care. -EthemD (talk) 12:26, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you EthemD. Best regards. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 13:29, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Dean R Koontz

The fanzine name wouldn't meant anything, and how would I get a copy to you to prove it anyway? How about you say he says it his book WRITING POPULAR FICTION (1972) where he admits the same damn thing? Onde book tracked down is called HUNG by Leonard Chris, does that help???

Why are you reverting my edits about suppressing the other books (which he admits to, for career reasons), and revising a few for re-publication (which he has, mostly badly), and the Mike Tucker series (which he wrote), and the homage to Parker, which is in the damn books? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.222.135.55 (talk) 02:40, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Can you quote page numbers and ISBN number(s) of the book(s)? Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 02:46, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Dr.K. is correct 90.222.135.55 and I would recommend you read WP:VERIFY, for further guidance. (Just passing by with my 2 cents.) Kierzek (talk) 15:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

You are always very welcome here Kierzek. Thank you for your support and your great advice. Drop by anytime. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 19:32, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:OR

What must be written so that it will not be a WP:OR? What about the following?:

• After resignation of president of SCCC, SCCC stopped to exist.

Your help will be appreciated. Note that, I want to insert later the founding of Supreme Court of Cyprus in place of SCCCBrasilian Prince (talk) 18:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. If you can find a reliable source to quote, (for both events), then it should be fine. It is just a little difficult to gather this information by interpreting judicial documents online, not to mention that they are primary sources (WP:PRIMARY). I hope this helps. I'll be off-line for a while so I may not me able to reply for some time, if you have any further questions. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 18:55, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

SCCC STOPPED TO EXIST: http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp - Tick all on the left pane - Application No: 27841/07 - Search FIRST SECTION DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 27841/07 by David Charles ORAMS and Linda Elizabeth ORAMS against Cyprus THE FACTS B. Relevant domestic law and practice (a) The Supreme Court The Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus provided for the existence of a Supreme Constitutional Court and a High Court (Parts IX and X of the Constitution respectively). Both these courts were each composed of a Greek, a Turkish and a neutral judge (Articles 133 and 153). The neutral judges, who were not subjects or citizens of Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom (and the Colonies), presided over the courts (Articles 133 and 153). This Constitutional arrangement lasted only until the beginning of 1964; following the inter-communal problems in 1963, the neutral presidents vacated their posts without being replaced. The Administration of Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Law 33/1964 (“Law 33/64”) was enacted in order to address a situation of emergency and to set up the necessary judicial machinery for the continued administration of justice. By virtue of this law, the two highest courts, that is, the Constitutional Court and the High Court, were merged into one, the Supreme Court of Cyprus, to which the jurisdiction and powers of the two pre-existing courts were transferred. The establishment and operation of the new Supreme Court was held to be in conformity with the Constitution on the basis of recognised principles of the Law of Necessity (the Attorney-General of the Republic v. Mustafa Ibrahim and others, (1964) C.L.R. 195). The Turkish-Cypriot judges of the pre-existing courts participated in the composition of the Supreme Court for a few years following its establishment but subsequently withdrew

http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp - Tick all on the left pane - Application No: 13832/05 - Search

FIRST SECTION DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 13832/05 by INVESTYLIA PUBLIC COMPANY LIMITED against Cyprus B. Relevant domestic law and practice The provisions of the above Article were rendered inoperative following the inter-communal problems in 1963. The procedure for reference under the above provision is no longer applicable. The Administration of Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Law 33/1964 was enacted in order to address a situation of emergency and to set up the necessary judicial machinery for the continued administration of justice. By virtue of this law, the two highest courts, that is, the Constitutional Court and the High Court, were merged into one, the Supreme Court of Cyprus, to which the jurisdiction and powers of the two pre-existing courts were transferred. The establishment and operation of the new Supreme Court was held to be in conformity with the Constitution on the basis of recognised principles of the Law of Necessity (the Attorney-General of the Republic v. Mustafa Ibrahim and others, (1964) C.L.R. 195). As the procedure for reference under Article 144 (1) is no longer applicable in cases other than those of the Family Courts, questions of alleged unconstitutionality are treated as issues of law in the proceedings, subject to revision on appeal in due course, in so far as the lower courts are concerned. All courts when dealing with a case are competent to examine questions of alleged unconstitutionality arising in the case which are material for the determination of any matter at issue. http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp - Tick all on the left pane - Application No: 47293/99 - Search – Click to “Selim v. Cyprus” (The 2nd Link) THE LAW The Court further notes that the Supreme Constitutional Court of Cyprus has ceased to exist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brasilian Prince (talk • contribs) 07:13, 25 July 2011 (UTC) NEUTRAL PRESIDENT OF SCCC RESIGNED: http://ir.emu.edu.tr/staff/asozen/conferencepapers/konjic2002.pdf On May 21 the neutral President of the Court, Professor Ernst Forsthoff who was a West German citizen, resigned.5 (5) Forsthoff resigned his post due to the reason that the decision of the Constitutional Court was not implemented by Makarios. Following is a part of the interview of Professor Forsthoff by a U.P.I. correspondent in Heidelberg, Germany on December 30, 1963. “ Q. Can you briefly state the last incident in the chain of events which led to your resignation? A. These criticisms against the Constitution increased as time went on and when the question of establishing separate municipalities in the five main towns was brought before the Court it was insisted that the establishment of such separate municipalities was not practicable. The Court formulated its decision with utmost care in order to make it possible for a compromise solution. I must add that a state does not cease to exist on account of any defect in local administration. Q. Has the Makarios government complied with the decision of the Constitutional Court dated 25th April 1963 on the subject of Municipalities? Was the non-implementation of this decision expected before? A. The fact that the decision of the Constitutional Court was not to be implemented was made quite clear to me and as it turned out it was not in fact implemented. Non-implementation of the decision of a Constitutional Court is sufficient reason to compel the resignation of its President.”

http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp - Tick all on the left pane - Application No: 27841/07 - Search
FIRST SECTION
DECISION
AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF
Application no. 27841/07
by David Charles ORAMS and Linda Elizabeth ORAMS against Cyprus
THE FACTS
B. Relevant domestic law and practice
(a) The Supreme Court
following the inter-communal problems in 1963, the neutral presidents vacated their posts without being replaced — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brasilian Prince (talk • contribs) 07:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the citations. But why do we have to go to actual cases (which are primary sources) and do all that jumping around with links etc.? What about the SCC? Don't they have a website with their history where they mention how they came to be etc.? Or any newspapers, or other reliable sources which mention the dissolution of the CCC? However I think that if your first citation (Orams vs. Cyprus) is correct you can cite that. I simply didn't have the time to check it but I trust that you described it correctly. Thank you again. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 19:46, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions. Sorry, I did not replied you punctually. I was out of my office.

Supreme Court of Cyprus (SCC) has an official website: http://www.supremecourt.gov.cy (of Republic of Cyprus). However, there is no info about history (i.e. dissolution of Supreme Constitutional Court of Cyprus (SCCC) and High Court of Cyprus and forming of SCC (Supreme Court of Cyprus) in this official website. I will try to find newspapers or other reliable sources which mention the dissolution of the CCC other than the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) official website.Brasilian Prince (talk) 07:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

That would be great. And there is no deadline, don't worry about the time. Thank you very much Brazilian Prince. Alll the best. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 10:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Twinkle notifications to banned user

Sure As you can see from his userpage's edit history, I have reverted them off myself several times (thanks for catching the one before last.) I don't know how to exclude his userpage, so I'll just try to check and make sure after my PRODs and AfDs. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

P.S. Whoops! We were posting at the same time. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem. It happens. Thank you for your reply. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 03:42, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Now y'all are getting it

Add the blue thing that's on the top of my page to your pages! And thanks, I got your email.Randnotell (talk) 02:36, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Randnotell. What is the blue thing on your page? BTW, I didn't send you an email. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 02:48, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Of course you didn't. And I mean, "This is not a Wikipedia article. It is the personal user page for a member of the Wikipedia community." I credit Hero, the greatest editor ever.Randnotell (talk) 03:17, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Also

Is there a messaging system that's not public? I wanna know what the B means.

Actually, I'll just watch your page. #selfeditorRandnotell (talk) 02:40, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

What is the B? Dr.K. 02:48, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Ahh, now you're really catching on. For next time, then.Randnotell (talk) 03:16, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Great. Can't wait :) Nice meeting you. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 03:53, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Minorities:?

Watch this out User talk:Aigest#Illyrian royalty. Propably minorities (sockpuppet of user Yangula): user Omnipaedista . Haters of Greece, Greek music and Greek history . Lovers of Turkish music,Gypsy music and middle east --94.66.147.75 (talk) 16:14, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Thought you might appreciate a read of

The conversations going on at the Kostas Novakis talk page and on my talk page. I'm certainly finding it very educational. The stronger the opponents POV the more research you have to do. The more research you do the more interesting it gets. That's what is so intriguing about Wikipedia. Although it would be nice not to have to do this.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 15:28, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Nipsonanomhmata. Seems interesting. I'll have a look. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 18:24, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I need some help on the Kostas Novakis talk page. I think that Fut Perf is steamrolling me and is exercising WP:IDONTHEARTHAT. Fut Perf is very good at making it look like the other person is always at fault. But I really do not think that I am. If you really feel that you can't help could you recommend an Admin that can. Fut Perf has completely ignored the last few paras that I wrote. Moreover, I feel that Fut Perf has never exercised Good Faith when communicating with me. I am always treated poorly (I feel that I am the dog that is being kicked) and I certainly do not deserve that. I have been accused of racism (more than once I might add). I have been accused of revert warring incessantly when I had not revert-warred at all. I am told that my language skills are not up to scratch. Basically, I am treated like an idiot. Lunch for Two has also accused me of racism. Once you have been accused it is echoed by others. I don't deserve that. I have been quite articulate and patient.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 12:59, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Nipsonanomhmata. Sorry for the delay in replying. I checked the situation very briefly and I have seen this is an old debate from 2008 which has revived recently. I haven't had the time to really understand the nuances involved, so I need more time to evaluate this. I'll let you know as soon as I examine this further. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 19:03, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks. Yes, it is quite a lot to take in. The main things to read are the Eleftherotypia article, the CD cover and contents, as well as the debate. I think that it is important how the origin of these songs is recorded on Wikipedia because the media references are easily misinterpreted and convenient POVs can easily be formed when there are useful facts that can be quoted that say otherwise.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 20:05, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Since the concerns that I raised in the discussion were ignored by the other parties involved in the discussion I have added a template pointing out that the factual accuracy of the article is disputed.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 02:40, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Have raised this issue at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard at [[1]].  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 00:29, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Nipsonanomhmata. I'll keep an eye on the discussion while trying to educate myself on the linguistic nuances of this debate. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 02:42, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Have you seen what Fut Perf just did at Dispute Resolution? As usual I am treated like a head-case. Then Fut Perf who apparently owns Wikipedia closes the debate. I am seriously considering leaving Wikipedia. It is an unbearable place.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 16:27, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry that this conflict has degenerated to this extent. It is not completely surprising given the area and the prior editing history of that area. I am also sorry I couldn't help but the linguistic subtleties involved still escape me and not being an expert in the area I would be at a disadvantage offering any opinion. Wikipedia can be a frustrating place when sustained conflict is encountered with other editors. The best I can advise is to just try and disengage from conflict for a while before making any decisions about your further participation here. At the same time don't make this conflict personal or characterise others unfavourably. It doesn't help you carry any of your points across any better and it causes damage to everyone. Also don't forget this is a wiki and one can only act in an atmosphere of consensus. If FPaS did not get overruled when he closed this, chances are he had the consensus behind him. Trying to second-guess the quality of that consensus is a second-order phenomenon, so ultimately unproductive. I am not saying that closing a discussion in which you are an active participant is good etiquette, no matter how conclusive the result of the discussion. I am just saying that you should not get worked up over it. The Balkans are an overall rough topic in this encyclopedia. So is the etiquette followed there, at least sometimes. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 08:22, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

If I had terminated the discussion in the same fashion I would have been stomped on. I am still none the wiser. I have not seen one scrap of WP:RS evidence that supports their view. I am still convinced that I have provided adequate WP:RS to negate their POV. I am left in a situation where wrong is right and right is wrong and there is nothing that I can do about it. The only thing that I can do is wait patiently for new WP:RS and then to contribute those at some point in the future. But this environment is not conducive and I have no idea how you are so kind and polite to everybody.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 14:18, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Nipsonanomhmata for your nice comments. I think that to contribute here successfully we must have a good picture of the architecture of the place as well as the interaction dynamics between editors. I will not elaborate very much other than to say that you should not let some negative interactions discourage you from editing here. Since our daily interactions with other editors are the closest point of contact with others they tend to affect us the most. Therefore these same interactions have a tendency to be blown out of proportion. When you encounter such a dynamic pull back and check the reason. If the reaction comes from more than one editor then the consensus is against you. Let it go at that time, nevermind what you think about the sources or any other arguments. That's where the architecture of the place comes into play. This being a wiki, someone else will come some time later and fix the problem which you perceive by providing new sources, arguments and/or changing the consensus. Or they may not. In either case it is ok. If they don't fix the problem, and assuming there is a valid problem, the wider web will catch it. They will then mark the problematic article(s) as propaganda. The reputation of Wikipedia will suffer. Someone from the wiki will notice this and they will try to fix it. It is a continuous cycle. No need to try to reverse it single-handedly in a collaborative editing environment. In the same wiki-architecture other editors, including admins, are sometimes forgiven crude behaviour as long as they are perceived overall as a net benefit to the project. There is considerable leeway in this sense. But crude behaviour, I think, is on the way out of the project. I may be wrong but I believe that this kind of behaviour is not sustainable here. Among other things it undermines respect for the local management here and thus it is ultimately subversive to the concept of a wiki. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 16:01, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The POV campaign continues at the bottom of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:%CE%98%CE%95%CE%9F%CE%94%CE%A9%CE%A1%CE%9F%CE%A3 . Apparently the Slavs in northern Greece are all of the same ethnicity as those in the "Republic of Macedonia". Ethnic fantasyland. And ofcourse Fut Perf will back him up even though Fut Perf is wrong. I am not getting involved.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 19:28, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

It's now moved on to Lofoi. I've got a much better understanding of the issues now. Have had to do much reading about the subject. A town like Lofoi in medieval times, apart from any existing population, may have also been populated by Arvanites and Vlachoi who were avoiding persecution in Epirus. A village like Lofoi may have been persecuted by Slavs from the north and it might have been in their best interests to go along with the Slavs and have an alliance from them. If they were persecuted by Slavs from Bulgaria they might make an alliance with them. If they were persecuted by Turks they might make an alliance with them. They would change their allegiance and in some cases their ethnic makeup to best suit their interests. However, in one case, the Bulgarian Exarchate provided a school and ran the local church and the local families would have given their allegiance to Bulgaria because they had no other school. As a result they would have learned Slavic from a Bulgarian school and depending on the teacher they would have acquired the dialect of anyone who taught at that school. The problem with the Lofoi article today is that propagandists from the "Republic of Macedonia" claim that the locals speak the "Macedonian language" (also called "Macedonian Slavic" by the government of the "Repubic of Macedonia"). They back this up with European Union research which appears to be WP:OR. Never at any time in history has Lofoi been part of the "Republic of Macedonia" or the former "Socialist Republic of Macedonia" (which was formed in 1944). On the contrary. At one time the village was part of the Bulgarian Exarchate. So the Lofoi article not only had the Greek name for Lofoi but also the Bulgarian name for Lofoi. The Bulgarian name has been deleted and instead the "Macedonian Slavic" name is given (which coincidentally in this case is identical) but instead of being labelled Bulgarian, it is being labelled "Macedonian" and they don't mean the historical kind, they mean the new kind, and ofcourse by doing so they are also laying claim to the historical kind. Also, it is worth noting that what is called "Macedonian Slavic" is considered a dialect of Bulgarian as well as a dialect of the new kind of "Macedonian". Apparently, there are two cities in the south of the "Republic of Macedonia" that use the same dialect of "Macedonian Slavic". Ofcourse the government of the "Republic of Macedonia" claims that all Slavic speakers in northern Greece and Bulgaria speak "Macedonian Slavic" which is the national language of the "Republic of Macedonia". Before the Bulgarians were involved all Slavic speakers in what is now Macedonia, northern Greece, were called Serbians. It appears that since 1944 the people of the "Republic of Macedonia" have been taught by the Communists that they are "Macedonians" and they have worked out a beautiful propaganda strategy of how to lay claim to an enormous region that they have labelled as "Macedonia" but which is much larger than ancient Macedonia. That's it in a nutshell. IMO the Slavic name should be labelled Bulgarian because historically it was part of the Bulgarian Exarchate. I can't think of any reason why the "Macedonian Slavic" name should be used (other than the claims that the majority of the population of the town speak it, even though it is highly unlikely that their ancestors are all Slavic). Nightmare. And ofcourse Slavic, the language, was first documented by a Greek priest before that there was no written form of Slavic. It's all beyond a joke.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 00:27, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

It's a really busy place here. Conflicts erupt everywhere. What can I say. In the case of Lofoi the problem is that without a citation countering the French citation you cannot argue, nevermind how logical your point may be or how bad the French citation may be. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 01:38, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

See conversation at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kwamikagami#Experience and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Macedonian_language#POV.2Fmisleading_captions_on_maps  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 11:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Good Old Church Slavonic. The Greeks teach them how to write and show them how to pray. Then the Slavs teach the Greeks how to bite the hand that educates them.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 01:09, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Uhhh...

I do not remember doing the former ottoman republic of greece, i think you have it wrong please reply on my talk page Macedoniarulez (talk) 04:02, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Reply

I thinks someones hacked into my account because i dont believe ive did that. i am going to chnge my password Macedoniarulez (talk) 07:24, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok. No problem then. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 16:08, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello Dr K!

Hey again, Can I post another 5 sections in Cyprus article on its History? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FindoutNicosia (talk • contribs) 17:28, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Sure. You can add material as long as it is neutral and it does not violate our policy of WP:NPOV. Good luck. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 17:56, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Greek Orthodox Church

Γεια σου!

Are you sure about this diff? According to the way in which the term Greek Orthodox is defined in this article, i.e. the informal aggregation of the several orthodox Church bodies of "Greek" tradition as opposed to other traditions in Orthodoxy, I think it makes sense to remove these flags. However this page is presently a bit messy and even the {{Infobox Orthodox Church}} does not give much information on what the fields mean exactly, so there may be bigger changes to make. Looking at other pages using the same infobox, it seems that Territory means the original, or canonical territory (in this case something like Eastern Mediterranean or Greece, Turkey, Cyprus, Albania, Middle-East may be enough) and Possessions means locations in the diaspora where the Church is organised (in this case, pretty much the whole world). What do you think of these changes? Please note I am not orthodox myself, so canonical jurisdictions are something a bit cloudy to me. Place Clichy (talk) 10:08, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

It looked like blanking to me. Blanking of long-standing information without discussion, no edit summary coupled with a probable connection of the Greek Orthodox Church domain to the removed locations looked like vandalism. The detailed definitions you are putting forward may need further discussion but this should be done at the article talkpage. This way experts on the subject, and I am not, may chime in. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 13:16, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Responded

Just to let you know i responded to your comment on that users page. Thanks :) Goldblooded (talk) 19:13, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. I saw it and replied there. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 20:58, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah i got it , But really it was nothing more than a minor dispute which me and the user involved settled. I appreciate your help and tips but in this case there wasnt any need of "piling on" as it will merely aggregate the situation. But its reassuring at least to know that your watching my back. Thanks. Goldblooded (talk) 21:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I had no intention of "piling up" or "aggregate the situation". Rather I just wanted to clarify a commonly misunderstood point about the use of userboxes on userpages. In a largely anonymous editing environment such use should always be taken with a (large) grain of salt and the userboxes should be considered as mere decorations and not as statements to be verified. The last thing anyone should do is try and redecorate any other user's page. But I am glad we finally agree on something. And I don't know what you mean by "watching your back". If it means that I follow your edits, I do not. I simply happened to see Τασούλας' edits recently and it led me to her talkpage where I saw the problem. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 21:20, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Well alright that was fair enough, What a meant by that expression i was lead to believe that you were watching my edits and giving me a bit of a hand , but i suppose not. Anyway it was a bit of a conidence that it was the same day , Besides i could of sworn i saw you around somewhere in my edits. Goldblooded (talk) 22:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

No way. I never went anywhere near your edits :) Except, of course, today in Τασούλας' page. But if you meant I was trying to help out, you were right. I was. Sorry for using the expression "policing the edits" regarding your action. It was meant as a general expression and not as an evaluation of your particular action. I did it to give some overall context from a general perspective and it was not meant to apply to you specifically or criticise you directly. But such are the limitations of the written word. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 23:16, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

On Pastafarianism

There is a large disagreement on the Talk Page about whether it is considered a Religion. I have contributed on the talk page, when will i know that it is OK to put in the proper edits?

King regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HotPocketman (talk • contribs) 03:00, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

It is more or less easy. When the other editors on the talkpage agree that you are right and they allow you to edit the article without reverting you. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 15:20, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello Dr.K!!

You haven't answer my question, can I expand Nicosia article in its history? I really have the knowledge and the way to make it a featured article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by FindoutNicosia (talk • contribs) 10:46, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello again. Last time I told you to edit the article you removed all the information about the Turkish sector which is a very controversial thing to do according to the other editors. So now I advise you to go to the Nicosia article's talkpage and try to get their approval. Whatever you do, if you see editors reverting you, go to the Nicosia talkpage and discuss instead of reverting back. I hope this helps. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 15:26, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

slam dunk! wow! Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 06:44, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately for them all ducks have common traits. Good work Seb. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 06:54, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Question

I have observed some pretty remarkable contributions from this account. I am curious, why are you not an administrator. Pardon that you have struck me as the kind of editor who could be a good one, and that you seem qualified by a cursory review. I am working on an essay, and I believe you are of the adman class. I'd like to see you become an admin. This working draft might explain, but you are exactly the kind of editor I had in mind. My76Strat (talk) 07:52, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much My76Strat for your kind words, although I haven't really thought seriously about becoming an admin. Being an admin should, ideally, be not a big deal. You do your job correctly, and like every other job there should, normally, be no problems. When it starts becoming a big deal, this is a sure indication that you must have made some relatively big mistake and then holding the admin position itself may become a big deal, among all the desysopping cries. If someone is not an admin and thinks it is important becoming an admin, akin to some kind of promotion, I think that they have the wrong attitude for the position. I saw some of your adminship reform related comments at Jimbo's talkpage, although I haven't followed the debate closely. Thank you for classifying me as an "adman", which I understood as a compliment after I read your essay. Hopefully more people can read your essay, just in case they think I have become purveyor of spam :) Anyway, keep up the good work and thank you again for your nice comments. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 02:35, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Advice

Hey Dr.K.,

I wonder if you could tell me or show me where I can learn how to revert changes to a Wikipedia page to an earlier version. I know how to revert a single change, but I've seen fellow editors reverting several in one step. I have looked at the editing overview guide that you posted on my discussion page, but I'm just not finding what I need. Sometimes I see multiple vandalism changes and I really want to know how to restore the page back to an earlier version. Thanks... JWMU — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwmu (talk • contribs) 01:42, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jwmu. You can use WP:TWINKLE. Just go to your preferences and activate it. I think it is in the gadgets tab. Once you activate TW go to the history of the article and choose the versions just before the occurrence of vandalism and the current version. Press compare revisions and then choose "restore version" from Twinkle. Let me know if you have any other questions. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 01:49, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Dr.K. for the advice. I see that you noted it does not work with IE browsers - how about Safari? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwmu (talk • contribs) 02:00, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

OK Thanks - I will try to upgrade my pc to IE9, but until then I'll try this using Safari on the MAC. Thanks for the assitance. Best -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwmu (talk • contribs) 02:09, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Don't mention it. Glad to be of help. Drop by anytime. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 02:12, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the additional advice on signing off with my comments. Jwmu (talk) 02:14, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

You are correct - so sorry, was not paying attention - it was the Sinebot. I read that comment/alert to quickly. Well - thanks and good night. I appreciate the help. Jwmu (talk) 02:25, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

No worries. All the best. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 02:29, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

It's true

Asking political or religious information is not in accordance with the accepted principles of right and wrong that govern this wiki. I deleted that unsuitable question. Let's hope MacGeddon won't feel harmed if he finds out. My apologies, Kr.D. Boutros Boutros Boutros (talk) 19:58, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Boutros Boutros Boutros for letting me know. No problem. You are obviously a good-faith user. I don't think McGeddon will mind. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 22:23, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Venetian Ionian Islands

Hello there. Why did you change the name of the article? You didn't even put it under discussion! I suggest you undo what you've done and start a discussion and let other people say their opinion on the issue. It's not about accuracy. The previous title was not confusing. See Venetian Albania for example. It's not like it's part of Venice. It's the Common name. Another example is Ottoman Greece and not Greece under Ottoman rule!!Before you change the title you make a proposal in the talk page, see here. --Marcofran (talk) 11:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Please spare me the patronising lecture and examples on how to rename an article. And don't use exclamation marks, bolding or other loud techniques when you talk to me. Not all article titles have to be renamed the way you suggest. I did a Google books search and the name "Venetian Ionian Islands" ("Venetian Ionian Islands" 42 hits) had fewer hits than "Ionian Islands under Venetian rule" ("Ionian Islands under Venetian rule" 79 hits), so under WP:BRD I moved it there because it is also a more natural-sounding title. If you want to move it back open a discussion on talk and explain why we have to move it back to a title with fewer Google books hits and prove why it is the common name while it has fewer Google books hits than the current title. Don't bother replying here; I will watch the article talk. By the way if you do a search for the other titles you provided above, "Ottoman Greece" and "Venetian Albania" have more Google Books hits than the corresponding "Greece under Ottoman rule" and "Albania under Venetian rule", so they are justifiably the correct titles for these articles. It just so happens that in the case of the Ionian Islands these facts are reversed and the WP:COMMONNAME is "Ionian Islands under Venetian rule". Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 07:05, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The E=mc² Barnstar
		Occasionally, I go through my list and find myself relieved to see when editors that "have a clue" are still around and working on the project. I'm giving this to you, long past due, for the enormous amount of work you have done on a wide range of articles. You solidify my belief that science articles should be worked on by people who know what they are talking about, rather than Randy from Boise. It's good to see you continuing to fight the good fight. Trusilver 23:52, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much Trusilver. This award coming from a distinguished and principled user such as yourself is an honour. It is also always nice seeing an old friend on my talk. Thank you for the wonderful gesture. Take care and I hope to see you around for a long time. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 00:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Nicosia article split

Hi Dr. K. Thanks for the tip yesterday and for your comments today in the Nicosia talk page. I would like to see whether you support splitting the article in two parts so that they can both grow separately. The article is so poor currently, its badly written and needs lots of attention.

At the moment it seems we're arguing and not letting the article grow. My proposal is for 2 articles, "Nicosia, Republic of Cyprus" to contain all information about the Greek-Cypriot capital which has jurisdiction over the whole of Nicosia and "Northern Nicosia, TRNC" which is a self-proclaimed entity of the TRNC and the de facto local government in the northern part. We should of course link each other and ensure they're consistent (at least with history). Interested to see your views. Masri145 (talk) 13:33, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Masri. I agree with you. You are making some great points. I will participate further in the article talk if the need arises. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 18:28, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I would appreciate your input as it seems that some people keep reverting your changes in the article without explanation. Thanks. Masri145 (talk) 10:47, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

warning

Thanks for the warning I was really tired. Today I realized that the same user used a similar trick when I wanted to rename the akdamar island as akhtamar island. I did not realize it that time. But now I know it and I will start a new rename request Ali55te (talk) 04:41, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if you took it as a warning. It was actually a friendly note designed specifically to help you avoid any other more heavy-handed reminder from someone else. I am glad it helped you. Best regards. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 04:44, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

We are arguing just a little on the Mayawati page. If I really offend you, then let me know, and I will take a break from editing that page. You do good editing and I want you to be happy on Wikipedia. I am sure that other people will talk to you on that page if I leave, and I would be happy with the result from BLPN also. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:50, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Notwithstanding our disagreement I don't want you to leave that discussion and I would never ask anyone to leave any discussion. I think you are a nice person and a good editor. I already retired from that thread so this is a moot point now. Thank you for your nice gesture. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 13:07, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dr.K.. You have new messages at Bluerasberry's talk page.
Message added 07:17, 10 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You are totally correct! Thanks - I will be more careful in the future. Blue Rasberry (talk) 07:17, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

POV fork ?

First of all, why did you think POV fork ? The article is not fork. Because that is new article. Why POV ? What kind of POV ? In German, French wikipedias have that article. I think your POV is not neutral. Takabeg (talk)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is never a good argument. As far as POV, I think your POV is not neutral demonstrably because you created the article against consensus. Let's keep this on the article talkpage. I remind you of the notice at the top of my talk. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 15:41, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

About Cyprus (island)

Hi Dr.K. A user has contested the deletion of Cyprus (island) on my talk page at User_talk:Fastily#About_Cyprus_.28island.29. As the editor who nominated the page for deletion, your input would be appreciated. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:28, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

fyro macedonia

yeah sb is having too much fun. that's why wikipedia is far from being neutral and objective — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vasarchit (talk • contribs) 23:31, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

WP:ARBMAC, like all Arbcom cases, was far from fun. But the parameters governing Macedonian issues established by this Arbcom decision have become the law of the land locally. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 00:19, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

DarrenBlame needs you

DarrenBlame (talk) 16:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC)Thank you Dr.K., i am trying to do the best of myself. What about this sort of articles without references? It is listed into luxury magazine in wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuPont_Registry

Indeed, I have just added external references about Luxury Rules, please take a look at my user page and please, write about it on my talks page. Thank you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DarrenBlame

I will reply on your talk. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 16:56, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

DarrenBlame (talk) 17:13, 25 September 2011 (UTC) Dear DR.K. maybe I need to profundize my research about LuxuryRules / Luxury Rules, about including it like a corporation, but with my article well-written, and with my actual references, might I include it like a Luxury Portal, or luxury online website, Right?

As a matter of fact in future, me or another editor could have done more intensive research about the corporation.

Sure, you can include it as a corporation if you find some good sources. You can also consult WP:CORP. Good luck. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 17:49, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Andreas Papandreou Real News addition

Hi. Real News is a political newspaper in Greece, published by the famous journalist Nikos Chatzinikolaou. I'm surprised you don't know it and ask what it is. I don't know if you happen to be a Greek or just a person interested in Greek politics, but Real News is one of the most popular Sunday papers. Ανδρέας Κρυστάλλης (talk) 19:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Who I am, or what nationality I am does not matter. What you say about Real News may be correct but I never saw it in the newsstands. Also "Real News" is an English title. How is this a Greek newspaper with an English title? Regardless, as in the edit I made to correct yours, we need a link to the actual article online so that we can verify what it says. The Kathimerini article did not verify what you added to the article so I had to repair it. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 23:15, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I understand that it sounds strange for a Greek newspaper to have an English title, but here it is [2] As for the Kathimerini link, it's true that it says most important Prime Minister, not best, but if you read the whole thing it also says that Papandreou's first government (1981-1985) is ranked by those polled "the best in Metapolitefsi". I believe this should be mentioned. Here it is [3] Ανδρέας Κρυστάλλης (talk) 00:01, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I know where the link to the Kathimerini article is, considering I was the one who found it first and put it in the article. But from a cursory look I can't seem to find the mention of the PASOK government being the best in metapolitefsi. Could you possibly quote the passage so I don't have to spend the time tracking the specific reference? However please avoid any more bolding of any passages. I dislike loud text. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 00:24, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

It's totally my fault, sorry. I gave you the wrong link, here is the one (in the same poll) that mentions "best government".[4] The exact quote in Greek is "η πρώτη τετραετία του Ανδ. Παπανδρέου –και όχι η δεύτερη– αναδεικνύεται ως η «καλύτερη κυβέρνηση» που είχε η χώρα". You can also check the many graphs given in that page, as they explain the poll in full detail. Regards. Ανδρέας Κρυστάλλης (talk) 01:22, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I added the info into the article. Regards. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 01:48, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Trump National Golf Club (Los Angeles)

Orlady (talk) 11:08, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Michaelglem

Ooops. As it happened I had checked the page history and saw the blanked warnings. But I had forgotten to consider them in light of your report since many AIV reporters (not you, in this case), often mistakenly report the removal of talk-page warnings as vandalism (it's not, actually, save for removing SPI notices and declined unblocks while a block is active, although I've sometimes wondered if we should add this sort of removal). Since I have blocked him already for edit warring, it's moot anyway. Daniel Case (talk) 15:33, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Actually, are you confusing my followup with this on another report (where it turned out that warnings had also been erased)? It doesn't look like I cut Michaelglem any slack in the mistaken belief he had not been warned ... our edit-warring policy is pretty strict there in any event. Daniel Case (talk) 15:38, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

As you said, no problem. :-) Daniel Case (talk) 15:44, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

You are too generous :) Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 15:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

For the dozen or so times you reverted vandalism on my userpage tonight :) I'm not sure what that individual's specific problem was with me, but he certainly seemed to want to get his point across. Trusilver 06:10, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Don't mention it Trusilver. It was the least I could do. And yes, the IP was a very persistent vandal. Hopefully the two-week block will help them relax a little. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 06:50, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the barnstar.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:20, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

You well deserved it. Thank you for your dispassionate and accurate analysis which helped others, including me, understand the plight of Ali55te. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 17:24, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Temple of Artemis (Corfu)

Orlady (talk) 12:01, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

New sockpuppet?

Hi. Do you think it's likely that User:Synderalla45 may be another Justice Forever sock? Richwales (talk) 16:48, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Good question. I was pondering this today. Looks like it. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 17:03, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

It's been about a month since the last one and there is activity at Northern Cyprus, so as the sun rises in the east... --Taivo (talk) 17:41, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Very well (poetically) said. :) Thank you Taivo. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 17:51, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

	Quality Management Inspection Medal
	I, [Inspector] No. 108, am honored to award you this medal for your intelligent persistence in eliciting the best out of the quality management inspection process. I appreciate your assistance in improving the "Stable Version" of the Temple of Artemis (Corfu) article. Always know that you have this humble inspector's gratitude and respect. Thank you. No. 108 (talk) 19:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much Inspector for your kind gesture. I am really honoured to be so praised by a user I respect and whose contributions I have held in the highest regard. Thank you also for the wonderful work you did at Temple of Artemis (Corfu). Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 19:35, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for François-Xavier Donzelot

The DYK project (nominate) 12:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey Dr.K !!! Thank you for your kind words of encouragement. I hope that i can edit "Dora Bakoyannis" page again. I thought i'd show you what i want to add and you tell me what is the best way to add it so i don't get into any trouble again. So the paragraph i want to add is

" In 2008, she was awarded the Emperor Maximilian Award-European Award for Regional Policy and Local Government by the State of Tyrol and the city of Innsbruck. In 2009, she was named as the first female foreign associate of the French Academy in Humanities and Political Sciences (Academie Francaise des Sciences Morales et Politiques). The same year, she was also awarded the title of Honorary Senator by the European Academy of Human and Political Sciences in Salzburg. In 2010, Dora Bakoyannis has been awarded the National Order of the Chevalry of the Legion of Honour of the French Republic (Ordre Nationale de Chevalier de la Legion d' Honneur)."

the links to that are: http://www.ccre.org/news_detail_en.htm?ID=1327

http://www2.mfa.gr/www.mfa.gr/AuthoritiesAbroad/North+America/USA/EmbassyWashington/Articles/en-US/FM+Bakoyannis+proclaimed+associate+member+of+the+French+Academy.htm

http://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/kultur/Europaeischen-Akademie-Ruettgers-neuer-Ehrensenator-id5251731.html

http://www.amb-grece.fr/politique_etrangere/distinctions.htm (the paragraph concerning her is further down if you scroll)

what is the best way to add it? do i just go to the page, edit the text and put these links at the "references" part? do i need to save the links in a particular format?

i also need to delete one word in the very first paragraph of her page, the introductory one, and change the name of the mayor that succeeded her under her photograph.

What is the best way to do it? i would be grateful if you could help me. Thank you very much and have a good week !!!!

Natpap (talk) 11:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Good Morning Dr.K !! Thank you for all your help. I changed the page, and put all the references in as you told me. I apologise once more for causing you all that trouble. It won't happen again. Thank you again and have a nice day !!! Natpap (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.164.115.39 (talk) 09:47, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Natpap. I'm glad it worked out. No trouble at all.The only problem was that what we add in an article must be supported by reliable sources and be verifiable. Once you got the idea there are no issues. Glad to have been of help! Take care. :) Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 13:12, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Permisison to use an image

Dear Dr. K,

I am completing a book on Alexander the Great's army to be published in the UK late 2012 /early 2013.

In collecting illustrations I came across a photo taken by you on Wikipedia and headed "Closeup of the hoplite armour exhibit at the Corfu Museum".

Could I use this (or details of this photo) for my book? If you grant my request I'll credit you for the photo when the book is published.

kind regards,

David Zoobream (talk) 20:45, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you David for the courtesy of notifying me. You have my permission to use my picture. Good luck with your book. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 20:55, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ringo (singer)

The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Hello Dr.K.! I hope you enjoy this cookie as an amicable greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 02:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much SwisterTwister for this unexpected but delicious treat! Take care. :) Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 02:42, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

My recent article

Hello, you recently flagged William Adams (judge), under the grounds that it was a "article about a living person in a negative tone" and generally unsourced. To begin, this was a page about a living person, who just so happened to be a judge at the time the article was written, (which, by the way, was under a rapid transformation, and was in no way negative, but rather informative). Nowhere in the article did I use undermining words such as "terrible" or "blatant" which may have emphasis on a "negative" page. Additionally, you state that the sources were incomplete and generally unverifiable; this is a current event , and sources change all the time. Look at this source, from Gawker, a trusted and official web news provider: http://gawker.com/5855478/reddit-video-apparently-shows-texas-family-judge-beating-disabled-daughter

Touch Of Light (talk) 05:29, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I can answer your comments on various levels: First you have to check the reliable sources WP:RS and biographies of living people WP:BLP policies a lot closer than you have. Gawker is a blog and not a reliable source and has picked up a video from youtube, another not reliable source. Further they could not identify the alleged judge at first, they had trouble communicating with his daughter because someone had taken over her account, and finally they got to identify the alleged judge through a family friend who had watched the video and thought the mannerisms of the man on the video were similar to the real judge. All of this sounds very unreliable and should not be imported in an encyclopaedia such as Wikipedia. Further, no major news source (CNN, NBC, CBS etc.) has picked up any of this and these news are only on the blogosphere. You have to wait until and if they do. Finally I did not delete the article. But the deleting admin agreed with my rationale. This means that experienced editors disagree with your position. In conclusion: Get more familiar with WP:RS, WP:BLP, WP:BLP1E etc. and when in doubt ask at WP:RSN and WP:BLPN for questions about reliable sources and biographies of living people. I hope this helps. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 13:25, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Hervé Vilard

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 00:02, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

George Papandreou

The article appears to be in American English, so if you're going to change one spelling to conform to British English, you need to change any others as well. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:41, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Bugs. I didn't notice. I assumed it was in British English already. I'll check it out. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 22:43, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

It appears it is a mixture. I checked and there were some "-ise" suffixes and some "-ize" and I changed the latter to the former. The rest of the characteristic spellings appear to be in British English. A few may have escaped detection. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 22:52, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem

Happy to revert If you haven't used WP:HUGGLE, you might be interested in trying it out. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:04, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Good point Koavf. Perhaps I should try to diversify, but I trust the old Twinkle. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 05:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

On stress and alternative viewpoints

I read through your interesting user page and talk page. You seem like the type of person I'd like to know better. I don't want to expand the discussion at RAN's talk page, but I'll note that I am a serious fan of trying to propose alternative viewpoints. It is occasionally effective, and I need to do it even more. I didn't do it this time, and should have. The irony is that reviewing RAN's work has generated too much stress in me, so I need to cut back.--SPhilbrickT 03:23, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your nice comments. I commented on RAN because his mistake was uncharacteristic of his past behaviour and I thought it was a good idea to point to stress as a possible cause. But you also make a good point; working on CCI is a difficult and thankless task. Detection of copyright problems is not easy and communication with the editors under investigation is difficult. I agree that this process can also be stressful on you as well and once you realise that, it is a good idea to disengage to whatever level you feel comfortable with. As with many types of projects, human factors play an important role in this project as well but they are often neglected. There is no easy answer as to a possible solution but a first step should be a self-realisation that something may be out of the ordinary; something like a stress-related clue metre. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 04:04, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Robert Frost

Hi Dr. K! I want to post something about the poem "The Road Not Taken." I saw "The Raven" article and found Featured article criteria, which suggests using "a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature. Claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate." You have posts on the Robert Frost article so I'm hopeing you can help me. I can find plenty of analysis on the "The Road Not Taken" poem (everyone seems to have an opinion), but I would rather base my post on the more respected books/writings on the topic. I haven't studied poetry formally so I don't know what these might be. I'm hoping that you can get me started and list one or a few of the "the relevant literature" and "high-quality reliable sources" in the poetry field that might discuss "The Road Not Taken." Thanks!--Codydakin (talk) 15:04, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cody. No problem. I would like to help you with finding sources for the poem. The first thing to do is open a new subpage of your userpage at User:Codydakin/The Road Not Taken. There you can add your analysis and sources. I can also add any sources I find there as well. After you think it is ok you can move it to mainspace as a new article. How does that sound? Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 17:47, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I like writing with Microsoft word, so I may end up writing about what I found at home. User:Codydakin/The Road Not Taken might be a good place for notes, sources, etc. Thanks! --Codydakin (talk) 15:47, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Anytime Cody. I am glad you found my suggestion helpful. I'll keep an eye on your subpage and pitch in if I find something worthwhile. Needless to say feel free to ask me anytime. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 15:52, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Creator of the Barnstar
		For creating the Cast Iron Engineering Barnstar. Pinetalk 07:45, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much Pine for the nice gesture. :) I really appreciate it. I also thank you for your great suggestions as to its design which helped me make it even better. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 13:29, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Byzantine Empire

Please see the discussion I have started on the Talk:Byzantine Empire page. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:11, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Kansas Bear. I saw the points you made there and I agree with you. I am also uncertain about the note added to the article referring to Lord Byron's opinion etc. I will see how the discussion develops there and probably I will chime in. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 20:35, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Learning in progress

Sorry for not signing the comment on the Talk:Great Blue Hole page, I should have read the advise on how to use the talk pages first. I just thought that my comment looked a little bit rude, it was not my intention and I totally understand that a reason must be given in editing a Wikipedia page. 80.213.121.45 (talk) 23:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Not at all. You are a new user and as such you cannot be expected to know these technical details. In no way I thought your comment was rude. in fact I thought it was very nice as well as justified. I also wish all users, new or old, were as courteous and kind as you are. Thank you for your message. It was very nice meeting you. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 23:58, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Byzantine Empire

Hello Dr. K.

I wanted to humbly comment on your latest edit on the Byzantine Empire entry. Was the removal of Robert Byron's "Triple Fusion" necessary or does reinstating the sourced content in annotated form violate WP:LEAD?

Also, was anyone (other than Future Perfect whose contributions to the "Stable Version" I respect) actually offended by the inclusion of Heisenberg's "Staat und Gesellschaft des Byzantinischen Reiches"?

Feel free to respond at your best convenience. No. 108 (talk) 18:39, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I would like to wish you and your family Happy Holidays. :-)

Thank you very much for your kind wishes Inspector. Happy Holidays to you and your family as well. :) My objections to Byron's triple-fusion theory are enunciated on the talk of the article here for your convenience. Run over them at your convenience and please let me know if you disagree. As far as Heisenberg's inclusion I have no opinion because I haven't researched the academic currency/validity of the book. Please let me know about any other issues or concerns you may have. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 18:49, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I've just read your comments on the Byzantine Empire discussion page and I think that your removal of Robert Byron's "Triple Fusion" theory was a step in the right direction. As for Heisenberg, he was a prominent Byzantinist whose (academic) work, I think, deserves to be included in the entry (excluding the lead paragraphs of course). In any case, I am not crazy about whether Byron and/or Heisenberg get a spot on a Featured Article. All this humble inspector asks at the end of the day is a "Stable Version" with accurate and reliable information rather than "below-the-belt" allegations of sockpuppetry (apparently, the Christmas spirit and "peace between men" isn't for everyone though I have only myself to blame for the errors I've made as a quality management inspector).

I regret vexing you with this loquacious response Dr. K, but it was very nice speaking with you and I truly appreciate the Holiday wishes. And as always, please continue making good faith edit contributions. Thank you. :-) No. 108 (talk) 19:35, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Rest assured Inspector, your exchanges with me are never vexing. I consider them a privilege. Take care my friend. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 19:43, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Dr. K, that means a lot to me. No. 108 (talk) 20:36, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

You are very welcome Inspector. It is always a pleasure talking to you. Keep up your excellent work. :) Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 21:58, 11 December 2011 (UTC)