User talk:Aldux/Archive 11

New Afrika paprika's sockpuppet

Please have a look here: [1] Tx.--Giovanni Giove 22:10, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Chad FAC?

I figure you must be busy in real life at the moment. But do you plan to eventually submit Chad to WP:FAC? I think it stands a very good chance of passing. Let me know if I can help. — Brian (talk) 02:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)

The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 13:15, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

User:PierreLarcin

I noticed you already had a discussion with PierreLarcin on the Rotary International page. I draw your attention to the fact that an arbitrage has been opened concerning this contributor here. Feel free to bring your contribution to the case. Best regards --Bombastus 22:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for your support in my successful RfA. I appreciate the trust you and the WP community have in me. I am also glad that someone appreciates all the articles from Smith's Dictionary. Carlossuarez46 22:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hooray!

Hooray! Congratulations Aldux! Picaroon (Talk) 00:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• Congratulations Aldux. Paul August ☎ 01:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thirded! Maybe one of us will get around to tackling Central African Republic next? (hint, hint) ;) — Brian (talk) 01:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Need your expert advise

Hello! I hope you are feeling great. I would like to have your comments with regards to these comments made by me. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 06:37, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

RE: ancient macedonia

Please refrain from reverting unheedlessly . I have included quotes from credible historians.

If you disagree , then simply find a source and included it as an alternative theory. But do not delete my source or you will be blocked. I am NOT POV pushing

As for the map, it is a genuine map from the above source. We can included both maps .

Hxseek 12:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

no it isn't. see Talk:Macedon. dab (𒁳) 12:59, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Hxseek has been temporarily blocked, so there should be plenty of time now to discuss WP:RS, WP:NPOV, and related policies and guidelines that apply to this situation. --Ronz 17:56, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Could you please take a look here and here? The same user continues his edits, regards! Kapnisma ? 07:59, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Need your views

Hello! I hope you are feeling great! I need your comments on this page and on this page as well. Your views on these pages will be greatly appreciated. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 08:53, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Quick question

Hi! A quick question: Would you mind stating your opinion on whether 2007 Swazi general strike is notable or not? There's a discussion on the talk page, but with rather limited input from just two users up to now. Thanks! —Nightstallion 14:36, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2

Thank you for your support in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! If you ever have any questions or suggestions for me, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best wishes, --Elonka 03:30, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Tigranes the Great

Hi I re-added the map since it kind of is important you can find the map on the Armenian Empire documentary and it is also found here, [2] he united with the Parthian Empire to battle the Roman Empire at times and various other states so mentioning it will be helpful, with regards. --Vonones 07:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator selection

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kirill 02:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Military of the DRC

Following your comments, I've improved the article a bit more. Do you think it's ready for A-class review? Buckshot06 16:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I believe that it would be a good idea, because not only this article is great, especially considering the few sources available, but if there are a few flaws that may have escaped during the peer-review they could be caught now. Again, my congratulations for your work. Ciao,--Aldux 23:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I echo that. I intend to read it closely soon. El_C 23:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Wandalstouring 08:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Memoirs of Josip Broz Tito

as reliable and undisputable historical source? I'm really surprised. They are treated most often as Yugoslav postwar mythological propaganda... AFAIK, in Bulgarian literature there aren't mentions of Bulgarian participation in the battle of Sutjeska even on symbolic level. Best wishes! - Jackanapes 19:39, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I checked the Serbian Wikipedia, which is probably the most detailed about this topic. Two Bulgarian regiments are listed there, 61 and 63, but only as presence. There isn't any information about their actions, which strengthens my suspicions that their sojourn there in that moment is questionable. - Jackanapes 19:51, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Check this map of the Bulgarian occupation zone. It seems that such information exists only in Yugoslav sources. - Jackanapes 20:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

To awnser your concerns, I've found a non-Yugoslav source, Tomasevich's The Chetniks. As for the border, remember that German, Italy and Bulgaria were allies, and as such were ready to provide reciprocal help to crush common enemies.--Aldux 21:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Alexiuscommenus

Hı Aldux, Alexius is using multiple IP adresses and make the same edits again and again, please just check these:

With the IP 74.134.238.58 [3]

76.199.1.114 [4]

70.225.166.166 [5]

80.15.132.42 [6]

With his own user name [7]

A specific example of his sockpuppetry: thats an edit by IP 74 [8] and thats from alexius with his user name :[9]

The IP adress 74 has its own talk page and has even been blocked once separately of alexius hımself..And i actaully think that he has more IPs than i listed above for instance i think that this is also another Alexius edit:[10] which says "The ghosts of Christian Anatolia, of those who were massacred in cold blood, will forever haunt those who occupy the land." One of the few areas alexius made some contributions is the article Economic history of Greece and the Greek world[11] and thats also the place this anonymous user has made edits:[12]

The most important thing ımho here is, he delibaretly acts like a different user, and he not only uses these accounts for edits to articles but also uses talk pages of articles by his different accounts to push for a certain POV, please look at his one, all of these comments were made in the same talk page, in the same days:

edit by 80.15.132.42 dating June 10 [13] edit by 74.134.238.58 dating June 11 [14] edit by 70.225.166.166 dating June 13 [15] edit by Alexius with his user name dating June 13 [16]..

What can be done about it? --laertes d 11:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

The editor who vandalized your page isn't Alexius: I immediately noted in that so magnifically trollish and sub-intelligent editing a user long banned to all's satisfaction, User:GreekWarrior. To what I did with him, ignore him, unless he continues vandalizing your page, as I'll temporarily sp your user page then. Regarding the other issues, Alexius isn't blocked so even if it's him, I don't see what should be done. If you feel it's an important thing with a pattern of disruption I'd advice you to ask User:Akhilleus, who's best regarding socks. Also, I must admit I'm a bit exhausted with Balkan-Turkish disputes, and I tend to avoid them lately.--Aldux 16:38, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

An old friend of yours

Hi Aldux, just a heads-up, there's a new case on WP:RFAR about our old friend Iasson. Thought you might be interested in commenting there. -- Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh s... I can't really believe that somebody would even think of discussing readmitting the worst troll I've ever met, compared to whom Bonaparte is the best of editors. I only hope that the ArbCom will refuse to receive the case, cutting the comedy short. But if it is unfortunately accepted, I'll leave a note.--Aldux 15:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Patron of England

Pretty complicated, indeed. As I understand it, Edward III elevated St George in the 14th century, officialy replacing St Edmund, who already had largely been superceded by St Dunstan first and then later by St Edward the King. Was that what you found? -- SECisek 17:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

More or less. While it does appear that 14th century is the correct century for St. George, most sources say he repaced St. Edward, canonized in 1163 due to considerable royal promotion in his favour, as patron. And I've found Newman saying that also "For many ages, St. Alban was accounted the Patron of England". It is also added in a biography that Thomas Becket became a sort of national patron, as Edund cult is aid to have been of only local interest and Edward's never counted much out of Westiminister. Haven't found anything on Dunstan, thought. This is what A Manual of the Writings in Middle English says: "until he was replaced by Thomas à Becket, Edmund was the national saint of England." --Aldux 21:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I have seen the St Alban & Thomas Becket claims as well. Thanks for your info. We have an anon. English nationalist disrupting the Edmund article as we are preparing to send it for GA. PLEASE, do you have a cite for this:

"It is also added in a biography that Thomas Becket became a sort of national patron, as Edmund's cult is said to have been of only local interest and Edward's never counted much out of Westiminister."

We asserted this, but we need a cite.

Thank you. -- SECisek 18:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure. Actually, I made an error of memory: Edmund's cult was limited, not local, and on a better reading actually its not so much of himself but of his shrine. Anyways, I'll give the exact quote from Frank Barlow's Thomas Becket, University of California Press, 1990, page 268: "England lacked a really popular national shrine, like St. Denis in France. St. Edmund was only of limited interest, the cult of St. Edward at Westminister always precarious. Neither had contributions to make like the water of St. Thomas."--Aldux 21:03, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I've also found this one, from The Anglo-Saxon World: An Anthology, edited by Kevin Crossley-Holland, page 212: "[Aelfric's hagiography] helped to secure the basis of the cult whereby, before Edward the Confessor and St. George, Edmund became the first patron of England."--Aldux 21:48, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Well done! -- SECisek 21:56, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Afrika paprika again

He has returned as User:No.13. They share completely identical interests and this user has just continued the fights with Italian wikipedians on Dalmatian-related articles, especially the Republic of Ragusa. They write pretty much the same, and No.13 has joined wikipedia right after the last of Afrika paprika's socks was indef-blocked. Checkuser confirmed that they're likely the same user.

I thought that there is a high chance that they are the same user - but after I've seen this edit, I have absolutely no doubt. For it is one of the many Pagania-like articles in which Afrika paprika and all his socks pushed their POV.

And as for further evidence, he has completely identical interests (of the countless articles) that Afrika paprika edited like Vladimir Prelog and Bunjevci. --PaxEquilibrium 20:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I've controlled his edits, and even discounting what Mackensen said regarding the checkuser, the evidence is crushing: they have exactly the same editing pattern, to a point that can't be a coincidence. Thus I've blocked the account.--Aldux 20:43, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd also like to point out that that which Afrika paprika was saying all this time about all users from Croatia having the same IP address is wrong. ;) This further narrows down. --PaxEquilibrium 15:07, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

---

He's back again, after you blocked his previous account; as User:DalmatinoA (see his contributions). He has returned to his old battleground at Pietro Tradonico (refer to the editing history of that article), where he characterized his edit as just info.

BTW I just noticed that he's (slightly) losing his creativity. User:No.13 was his thirteenth sockpuppet. :))) --PaxEquilibrium 16:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

P.S. even more obvious than I thought. I guess that "A" after "Dalmatino" he took from the first character of his original username. :X This is getting hilarious. --PaxEquilibrium 16:07, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

LOL. You really think you are clever. 1. No.13 account was not my 13th acount but rather a simple number, I consider the #13 to be my lucky number. 2. DalmatinoA, my newest account is named that way because I wanted to create tan account named Dalmatino but since it was taken I just added the first letter up there. On the other hand why don't you people give me a chance for once? Take a look at my last few accounts you blocked for no other reason but for my past sins. Where do you see there any vandalisim or similar disruption in my edits? Yes I broke the rules when I first came here, and yes it was big time disruption after you blocked me for 3RR which I thought was punishment and favoring the other guy but I was not the first nor the last to make that same mistake. Will I never get the second chance? --DalmatinoA 16:26, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, that was just a joke, attempting to lighten up the situation after your return (which is, sadly, a worrying matter).

"A chance for once"? Well, because you wasted your all chances as User:Afrika paprika. Let me quote WP:BAN: The Wikipedia ban is a formal revocation of editing privileges on all or part of Wikipedia. You have actually managed to climb into Wikipedia:List of banned users, which is restricted to the very few excessively abusive minority. Do you actually have an idea how hard it is get banned? And what's more, you have received a community ban (which is even more "rare" and "difficult to achieve"). And do you realized that you passed greatly that criteria? Further sock-puppetry and deceits how it is not you, blatantly lying to the entire Wikipedian Community (and all of its millions of users), only is an act of further violation of Wikipedia's policy - guess what, in this whole year you've never faced your ban, but just kept creating new sockpuppets and tried to fool the Wikipedian Community. You've had plenty of chances, you just didn't use them - and ergo, I'm not really inclined on giving you an nth one, but of course I cannot speak in Aldux's name.

You are not banned just for your past sins (which're enough to earn a ban - which means that you must stay off Wikipedia's editorial world, and that you have never obeyed). I just checked the block log of your "other faces", such as Factanista - and you were disruptive there as well, and the same with your next clone of Tar-Elenion. Not to mention that in that period you (especially as Factanista) constantly told people to f##k themselves, and especially naughty was the 19 times vandalizing of my user page by adding that I suck Vojislav Seselj's d**k. If you were blocked/banned just for 3RR, it would've presented no major issue - but you weren't. Your violations exceeded greatly beyond that; and according to your uncivil edit-warring as User:DalmatinoA (your current username), you haven't really changed. I'm always in support of giving guys second chances, but the problem is with giving third chances... and although I have no idea what User:Aldux's opinion is, I certainly oppose giving you a forth chance. Everything has its measure (even in violation of rules), and enough is simply enough. --PaxEquilibrium 11:29, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I know Pax that you would not give me one chance. Besides I was never given one anyway. I was blocked for my own stupidity, no one EVER explained to me anything about 3RR and things like that when I first came here. The things I did with your userpage and userpages of few other memebers (admins) is not something I am proud of, quite the opposite. That was done in the heath of the moement and as an act of desparation. And you are very unfair. Where was I disruptive in Factanista and Tar-Elenion? You are again talking about few 3RR minor incidents, with Tar-Elenion I was blocked because I was trying to mediate but was characterized as participant as the mod blocked EVERYONE INVOLVED THERE. I was unblocked shortly. So what are you talking about? With my last account No.13 I didn't had one incident. I ask myself why did I get community ban? I would like to know more about that to, I am sure you know far more about then me since you were one of those people advocating it. Anway what was I supposed to do? Do you really think one can just stop editing after block like that? Would you leave? I sincerly doubt it. I was community banned almost immediately after my block like I was some hardcore vandal, I never vandalized one article here neither I did any major disruption. And if I was edit-warring so were you, I don't see you getting banned or blocked. Instead while we were debating you were reverting with the help of your friends and stabbed me in the back posing as my "friend". But that was in the past now, in fact I did leave at one moment I wasn't here for couple of months then I later came back hoping for a fresh start. Obviously I am so terrible that I don't deserve one, only if you could name just one article which I vandalized. --DalmatinoA 14:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

• sigh*. Just countless warnings about 3RR at your talk pages (even your original and many of your socks) and the fact that you've been blocked for 3RR numerous times show that you were perfectly aware of 3RR. If you just decided to ignore and not read those (and truly didn't know), all those blocks & warnings then you have been acting highly irresponsibly and we have very full reasons to treat you the same way. Frankly, I think it's impossible that you didn't read them, because you actually replied to quite a few of them. If you want to present that it was bad to have you community banned by saying that after a year and a half of disruption you've "rehabilitated" (which your most recent edits under DalmatinoA show you didn't really change), you're doing a no-no. Yes, I do think that one can just stop editing, because it's an exclusively limited minority of disruptive editors (less than 1%) to which you belong. I'm simply not going to get banned, and I'm sure of it. Do you actually have any idea how difficult it actually is to get banned? And you crossed that line, even deep further. Why can't you accept that? And since you were practically never banned because of constant sock-puppets, does it really show that you've accepted Wikipedia's policies? It doesn't seem to me... You didn't even try to contest your block. And in this post you just self-contradicted first admitting and then denying vandalism and disruption (!). And I wasn't edit-warring. Let me refresh your memory how it went: :

1. I post on talk page

2. I wait for a very long time

3. I notify you on your personal talk page to get back to the discussion

4. seeing absolutely no progress and ignoring from you, I rv back Pagania

5. you revert to your version and post very uncivil messages at the talk page accusing me for many, many things

And as for at least one article, how about the one you just yourself mentioned in the very same post: my talk page? I never stab anyone in their back, I just report them if they violate a rule, or at least warn them. And I am "friend" to everyone, because it's the basis of Wikipedia. And frankly, if you ask my personal question - I don't think that you've changed at all (your contributions say so)... --PaxEquilibrium 23:20, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Frightner

Please. Give talking a chance. Before we started talking, we needed to block several IPs a day, and revert dozens of edits. If he gets nasty, we can certainly go back to that; but don't you think it's better that we talk to him? --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 16:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Will my beneficial edits to any article be reverted? Regards. 203.59.118.146 14:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Lets put it this way: if your edits fully respect wikipedia policies, are carefully backed with reliable sources (please, please read with care WP:ATT), I will have no reason to take them away, for the same reason I would not remove the correction of a typo error.--Aldux 16:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for allowing my edits as long as they abide by Wikipedia's policies. On another hand, Mr. Neutron reverts most of my edits which benefit certain articles because he has a personal grudge against me. 203.59.172.94 10:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Hı again

I know aldux that you dont want to be much involved in these Greco-Turkish disputes but this case requires some attention ı think..Obviously one single user with several IP's keep pushing POV in several articles for a couple of days: Greco-Turkish War (1919-1922)‎[17], Fall of Tripolitsa‎[18], , Navarino Massacre‎[19], Occupation of İzmir..

IP involved are:85.75.172.58 [20]

87.203.216.92 [21]

85.74.124.113 [22]

It might be alexıus or not i dont know, these are Alexius' favorite articles, but in any case one single user blatantly push a nationalist POV..Just to inform you...Regards --laertes d 23:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I note they're also your favourite articles, and you've violated WP:3RR several times in recent days. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 00:53, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

And ı also noted that they are also your favourite articles Kekrops and interestingly you violated WP:3RR several times in recent days.. [23] starting from August 8 you made 5 reversions within 24 hours while reverting Kudret abi's reversions ..

But thats not much the problem with me, however a persistent POV imposition is coming from this user with several IP adresses..--laertes d 09:24, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I did nothing of the sort; you're confusing reversions with mere edits. Take another look at WP:3RR. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 09:57, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I dont want a dispute over this but you have made 5 reversions within 24 hours, reverting Kudret abi and Jakew..check it better..--laertes d 10:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Maps

Aldux - do you mean do blowup maps of the districts of Chad by region? Rarelibra 20:17, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)

The August 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 08:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Misquoted source

Hi Aldux, I was wondering if you could pop in to Talk:Franco-Mongol alliance#Misquoted source to help clear something up? It appears that the information that you provided, may not have been an accurate interpretation of the meaning of the source. Could you please stop by, to let us know if you actually read the entire book and are offering your opinion based on that, or were you just quoting a fragment of a footnote that you got via a Google search? Thanks, Elonka 18:13, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Merging proposals

Please see Talk:Borota raid. It counts also for Amdjereme raid. After trying to cleanup them, some issues still persist --TheFEARgod (Ч) 13:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

For Borota, I'm opposed; but after some consideration, I think that it's OK if we merge Amdjereme raid.--Aldux 01:13, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Responsibilities

Aldux,

As an admin, you have a responsibility to either fairly deal with all editors or recuse yourself. You are siding with phg claiming a universal consensus that does not exist. There are four editors who believe that 3 separate maps (rather than one map combining all three to show aggrandize greek territory) would be fair. Phg can push his view, and other more modern objective views can also be displayed. This is a fair compromise. Yet you insist on phg's map because it will confuse other readers into thinking that greek territory extended that far (i have shown the map to 4 different people, and no one thinks that phg's version consists of 3 separate maps). This is unfair. Answer the question: Why not have 3 different maps to make this a "comprehensive encyclopedia article" as PHG loves to claim?

If you proceed to inject yourself in this fashion without fairness, you will only betray your biases. Shame on you for abusing your role as an admin.

Devanampriya 02:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Chad is on the main page, so congratulations! It's really nice to see an African country featured like this. Good job on the rewrite, and I'll try to do my part to fight the inevitable vandalism. — Brian (talk) 00:34, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Brian: this is also thanks to you, as you helped me detecting the problems with the article, especially, in the "culture" section, and gave it a thorough rewrite, a thing I could hardly have been able to do on my own, assuring the article would have a decent prose. For all this, thanks! :-)--Aldux 01:04, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Chad

You've done an excellent job on this article, well done! It's well written, presented and very readable. I enjoyed it, and it's very informative. I've learnt lots. Wikidea 00:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your nice words: I've always had a particular interest in expanding the covering and thus the knowledge of Chad in wikipedia, and this is especially dear to me as it's a sort of crowning of my efforts on Chad-related topics :-)--Aldux 00:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

• I now noticed that you managed to bring Chad to FA status. Congratulations from me as well! It is my intention to do the same thing for Greece one day, but I'm a bit bored lately!--Yannismarou 14:11, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Yannis, and soory for awnsering so late :-) I'm really going to wait for your Greece article, with your knowledge of the country in its various aspects and your editorial skills and ability in making FA no other editor could hope to do such a work as well as you. Obviously, there's no rush. And as for being bored, nobody understands you better: I've myself reduced my editing, partly due to my work, but also due to a certain frustration with the unpoliteness and confrontational attitude often present in history and politics articles in wikipedia.--Aldux 23:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Franco-Mongol alliance

Hi Aldux, please do not hesitate to drop by on the Talk:Franco-Mongol alliance page, as there is still some dispute as the extent and nature of the alliance. I would appreciate your knowledge and comments on these matters. Best regards. PHG 07:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Chadian parties

We could limit it to parliamentary parties. Electionworld Talk? 22:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

You could add a section with major boycotting parties. Electionworld Talk? 16:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Porus

Yes anon user was probably correct with the removal of that text, I didn't read it in context but no reason was provided so it felt like one of Devanampriya typical edits. Speaking of whom, have you seen his recent activity? I need help in reporting him but I do not know the correct procedures to be taken. ([[User:Giani g|Giani g]] 13:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC))

Hey Aldux

I was in Florence two weeks ago, the homnetown of my maternal grandmother. Great city you've got there. I really liked San Miniato al Monte. I didn't get to see the Etruscan Chimaera unfortunately because everytime I went to the archeological museum it was closed. Anyhow, just wanted to say hi. Will probably upload some pictures soon.- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 14:48, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Eupator, sorry for awnsering so late, but I don't edit as much as once did and so saw it just know. It's great to hear you're in Florence, even if I must tell you I don't live anymore in Florence, as I moved upstream (upstream the Arno river, that is). It's nice to hear from you, and I'm happy you like it: September is a good month to be in Florence, not too many turists, and it's generally still quite hot. Ciao,--Aldux 20:01, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Italiotis

Hi Aldux could you please justify your latest edit into Macedon as it doesn t make any sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Italiotis (talk • contribs) 16:30, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

It's the infobox that utterly doesn't make any sense. Even if it seems to have simply used what was contained in the article, from this it deduces wild conclusions, that are certainly not there (and this I know quite well, as I worked considerably on this article).--Aldux 16:34, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I mean Aldux surely you agree that the Alexandrine empire did reach India. The people then did spoken ancient greek , the religion was the dodecatheon syncretic with local eastern elements , the currency was called drachma and indeed the story of macedon is linked with argead dynasty and greece before the conquest and with the four hellenistic kingdoms and roman empire after the death of Alexander. So i think it is a really helpful schimatic infobox and by removing it or altering it you simply make poorer the article. So I don t believe you should remove it and i think it should stay there unless there is a specific point you wanna makeItaliotis 16:48, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Elonka+Devanampriya

Hi Aldux, could you kindly consider giving your comments on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, where I am being attacked by Elonka and …. Devanampriya, of all associates? Best regards PHG 16:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Indo-Greek kingdom

For your information, the article on the Indo-Greek kingdom is under FA review following a request by User:Devanampriya to User:Blnguyen. You may leave comment at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Indo-Greek Kingdom. Best regards PHG 19:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

FARC coming soon. I believe the article has improved a lot! Regards. PHG 11:24, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

It's good to know that the articles is making progresses. Don't worry if the article loses its FA status: many articles have lost their FA status but early reaquired it.--Aldux 13:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

You're right, but loosing it because of Devanampriya, of all users, would be quite a shame for Wikipedia. Don't we have to make a stand against ignorance, partisan POV-pushing and constant incivility? PHG 14:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The point is that to you this seems an exceptional case, as the area in which you edit is after all quite peaceful. But I've seen all the worst that wikipedia can give, where trolling, personal attacks and bad-faith pov-pushing are so massive and common that the idea of "making a stand" seems simply futile. Wikipedia is something at the moment deeply unperfect and unreliable; but luckily it's also a work in progress, and especially where disputes are not so hot in the last 2 years lots of good work has been done, especially in the less controversial areas. So we can only hope that in time uncivility and pov-pushing will be dealt with more severity. And again, those stars don't really say much of the value of an article, so you really shouldn't think all that much about it.--Aldux 15:09, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Still, a simple one-line comment by someone of your standing would be highly usefull. Regards. PHG 15:30, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)

The September 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 08:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Chadian Arabic

Hello

I agree with you now. But it would have been a lot nicer of you, if you had addressed your point without the attitude and rude remarks. I don't think I was making provocative edits.

Regards. Parishan 02:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Constitution of Chad

Hi Aldux, I was reading this article in hope of adding some comments to the long-ignored request for Peer Review when I encountered this sentence in the "Constitutional process" section:

In December 1991, with considerable retard and due to both serious armed challenges to Déby rule anf French pressure[7], a 79-member commission was instituted to prepare the ground for the conference that, originally scheduled to be convened in May 1992, was on the occasion postponed.

The use of "retard" there is very jarring, & I was wondering if this is either a bit of vandalism that has snuck in under the radar, or just an artifact of a bad translation into English. (It's obvious that "anf" is a typo.) Can you shed some light on this? Thanks, llywrch 16:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's even simpler than that: it's a result of my bad knowledge of English, which makes me use eccentric terms. Even if, looking better, since the original source was French and not English, this also probably played a role. I'll correct immediately "retard" with "delay". And thanks a lot for noting the peer review; I had lost any hope somebody would care to leave me a note there! Thanks again, and ciao.--Aldux 17:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)

The October 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 12:50, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Franco-Mongol alliance

Thank you very much for your assistance at this article's talkpage over the last couple months. We are still having a bit of a stalemate at the article though, so if you have time, I was wondering if you could offer another opinion? I have created a subpage in my userspace where I have rewritten the article from top to bottom, shrinking it down from 167K to a little less than 70K, removing some of the unreliable sources and less relevant information, splitting other sections out to more appropriate articles, and most importantly, trying to smooth out the writing so as not to give undue weight to certain POVs. My rewritten version of the article is currently at User:Elonka/Franco-Mongol alliance. I've announced it at Talk:Franco-Mongol alliance#Article rewrite, but because this is such an obscure subject, it's really been very difficult to prove that there is consensus for the new version. If you have a few minutes, could you please look over the rewrite, and offer an opinion on it? I am very open to making changes, but I'm in a situation where I basically have one editor (PHG) who keeps saying "no," and no one else seems to want to comment and help break the stalemate. We've been trying mediation for the last month, but without success, and even our mediator appears to have gone AWOL, with no posts for over a week now. I would very much like to find a way to move forward through this dispute without having to further escalate it towards ArbCom, and it's my genuine hope that if we could just get some more editors actually commenting there to prove a consensus, it could help a great deal. Any assistance appreciated, Elonka 17:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Indo-Greek Kingdom

• Hi Aldux. You contributed to Wikipedia:Featured article review/Indo-Greek Kingdom. We are now in the voting phase, if you wish to participate. Regards. PHG 12:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge possibility

Any reason to keep Prime Minister of Chad and (the outdated) Heads of government of Chad separate? I suggest the first be redirected to the second, and the contents merged. Biruitorul (talk) 16:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Biruitorul, nice to hear from you :-) I think your idea is perfectly OK, don't be afraid to proceed: I gave a look at the current constitution, just to be sure, and it's stated clearly that the prime minister is the head of government (the praxis is a bit different, as often happens). Ciao,--Aldux (talk) 22:16, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll do so in the near future. Cheers, Biruitorul (talk) 17:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I've merged the two at Heads of government of Chad. Note there's now an inconsistency: the history section says the post was created in 1975, while the list would indicate 1959, so perhaps we could smooth over that discrepancy. Biruitorul (talk) 18:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

My RfA - thanks

Thank you for your support in my request for adminship, which succeeded with a final tally of 38/1/0! I hope I can live up to the standards of adminship, and I will try my best to make Wikipedia a better place. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 18:38, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Classification of admins

Hi Aldux. Please consider adding your admin username to the growing list at Classification of admins. Best! -- Jreferee t/c 22:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Islamic Legion in Ugandan-Tanzanian War?

Hi Aldux, Buckshot06 recently expanded Ugandan-Tanzanian War (1978-1979) to list the combatant "regular Libyan Army units, People's Militia, and sub-Saharan Africans of the Islamic Pan-African Militia, a further force created by Libya for this type of expeditionary mission." This "Islamic Pan-African Militia" sounds really similar to Gaddafi's Islamic Legion and I was wondering if you have any info that can shed some light on the subject? Cheers, BanyanTree 01:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes you're absolutely correct: the Islamic Legion is also often called "Islamic Pan-African Legion", and it was certainly present in the conflict you speak of: Kenneth Pollack in his Arabs at War dedicates seven pages to the Libyan intervention in Uganda, and clearly states (p. 369) that to confront the Tanzanian offensive the Libyans airlifted in February 1979 2,500 troops, of various corps among whom was the Legion. But now that I look the sources of the articles, I see that has used exactly this book, which mentions precisely the "Islamic Pan-African Legion" (369) and the "Islamic Legionnaires" (371).--Aldux 02:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Great. I'll change the article. It's always a pleasure doing business with you. ;) - BanyanTree 03:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 3

Thank you for your participation in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate that landed on WP:100, but ultimately was deemed a successful declaration of consensus, and I am now an administrator. I paid close attention to everything that was said in the debate, and where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better admin. I am going to take things slowly for now -- I'm working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school, double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. I sincerely doubt you'll see anything controversial coming from my new access level. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, though I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are a few more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status. If you do ever have any concerns about my activities as an administrator, I encourage you to let me know. My door is always open. --Elonka 02:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Imo State

Hi Aldux. Does Bill edmond (talk · contribs) remind you of anyone? Strikes me as Igbigbo (talk · contribs), who we were having trouble with on Imo State months ago. This edit is reminiscent of the name of his sock, Academicigbo (talk · contribs), and his comment to me here. Here, meanwhile, we have Bill edmond readding the non-notable people I removed from the list of natives. I eventually deleted the article as a copyvio, so Igbigbo and his earlier socks' edits can be found at Special:Undelete/Imo State. Any thoughts on Bill edmond? Picaroon (t) 00:56, 23 December 2007 (UTC)