User talk:Ashmedai 119

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Ashmedai 119, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Nehwyn 12:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HELP US MAKING THE PROJECT OF ANCIENT GREEK WIKIPEDIA

We are the promoters of the Wikipedia in Ancient Greek. we need your help, specially for write NEW ARTICLES and the TRANSLATION OF THE MEDIAWIKI INTERFACE FOR ANCIENT GREEK, for demonstrating, to the language subcommittee, the value of our project.

Thanks a lot for your help. Ἡ Οὐικιπαιδεία needs you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.40.197.5 (talk) 19:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

reorganization of articles on Hellenism

Hi Ashmedai 119,

I just saw your post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome#Hellenistic World (to which unfortunately noone has responded so far). I made a similar request at Talk:Hellenism#reorganization and foreign-language articles. Perhaps you may want to comment there?

Joriki (talk) 16:22, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom of Pergamon references for verification? ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 17:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sicily

Order of relevence, for example if people are looking for articles on Sicilian history, its kings and 700 year Sicilian kingdom is likely to be of the most forefront of interest/relevence. - Gennarous (talk) 00:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Welcome to wikipedia. If you do edit an article, especially something as recent as the protests in Iran you must use edit summaries. You write them in the small textfield above the "Save" button. Wandalstouring (talk) 08:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles needing work

Hello, I see from your comments on the Orlov revolt that you have thought a bit about issues of Greek ethnogenesis and so on. You might want to contribute to Greeks and Names of the Greeks, which currently are full of anachronistic essentialism, the sort of thing Rotzokos and others have criticized effectively. --macrakis (talk) 12:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Greek Enlightenment

Hi, I was referring to the wrong link. But now it's correct. A Macedonian (talk) 15:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re

Feel free to restore. I do not intend to argue nor to revert. I just have a constant worry about not gettting this article huuuuuuuge, but clarity is above everything. So, if you deem it necessary, readd it. Another worry I have is that, yes, as you had written, this was the Church's policy (which Orthodox Church's exactly? Of the Patriarchate?), but the reader may get the impression that the Church was phanatically anti-Revolution without any obvious reason. Yes, the Church (any Church) is traditionally conservative and reactive, but I think that Arnakis, when saying "though the Porte took care not to attack the church as an institution, Greek ecclesiastical leaders knew that they were practically helpless in times of trouble", offers another very interesting aspect. They knew that they could potentially pay for any Turkish death. And indeed Gregory, despite all these encyclicals, was the first target. It is a human parameter which should not be omitted. I may be pro-Revolution, but if I know that I may face retaliations - not only me, but my colleagues, my family, my people in Constantinople - then, what am I doing?--Yannismarou (talk) 07:42, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did not say that fear for retaliations was the only motive for the Church's decision, but it was a motive. Anyway, historians dealing with the Revolution tend to see this or this aspect of the stance of the Church. For instance, I do remember that Svoronos also regarded as an obstacle for the revolutionaries' efforts. Honestly, I do not remember which was Paparigopoulos' approach, although I had read him years ago. For me there is no straightforwarding answer, and no single truth. Historians may discuss the issue for years. See for instance this very interesting article in To Vima.

My opinion? Yes, the Church was conservative. Yes, the Church was initially anti-Revolution. But, especially the Patriarch had little place for manoeuvres. At least, this is my impression. And, judging from what happened with Gregory, I must say that, if I was Patriarch, I would also have anathematized Ypsilantis, despite my true feelings towards his course of action!--Yannismarou (talk) 13:09, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --Kansas Bear (talk) 11:03, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

Your recent editing history at Greek genocide shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Dr. K. 15:46, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Massacre of Phocaea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Henry Morgenthau. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ashmedai 119. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Ashmedai 119. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Guido Jung

Hi, I just promoted the hook you approved to the queue. It was a little borderline, because per Rule H2, you're not allowed to approve your own hook. In this case, I felt that the nominator changed it enough to make it his own. In future, if you have a good idea for a hook, you can either hint at it with a few words, to get the nominator to write it himself, and then you can approve it — or you can go ahead and write it yourself, and then (if the nominator likes it), call on another reviewer to approve it. The idea is to have as many eyes as possible on the hook to make sure it meets all the requirements. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 20:58, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message, Yoninah. That was negligence on my part and I am sorry for this, but I'm glad it all worked out eventually. Ashmedai 119 (talk) 22:03, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia

Hello! Your submission of Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —howcheng {chat} 22:48, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 16:47, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia

Hello! Your submission of Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:37, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia

On 25 September 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the reluctance of Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia to support national causes triggered a wave of terrorist violence from nationalist bands? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Battle of Meligalas

Hello! Your submission of Battle of Meligalas at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Reidgreg (talk) 00:53, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The only question is about whether you want an image. If you do, then there needs to be text like (pictured, graves of victims) added to the hook(s). Otherwise I think they're good to go. BTW: One machine translation of πηγάδα returned "dungeon" instead of "well" and also mentioned a concentration camp at Meligalas. It doesn't affect the DYK, I was just wondering if they were connected. BTW2: How do you find featured articles from other wikis that aren't on the English Wikipedia? – Reidgreg (talk) 00:53, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Battle of Meligalas

On 2 November 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Meligalas, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that after the withdrawal of German forces, left-wing partisans defeated and summarily executed some 700 to 1,100 Nazi collaborators in Meligalas, Greece? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Meligalas. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Ashmedai 119. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Ashmedai 119. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Byzantine Greeks article

Hi. I have been reading your comments there (not the entire discussion, mostly your comments due to being of a well-educated nature, you seem to be a historian). The two sides of the dispute need more community input to achieve consensus. I suggest making a formal move request. I do not have any particular interest or opinion on the article, but giving a solution to a long dispute indeed benefits Wikipedia. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 07:17, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your kind words, Ktrimi991, and for taking an interest in this affair. I hesitate to initiate a requested move discussion not merely because I am unfortunately not entirely certain that I will be able to be continuously present here for the period during which the discussion lasts, but also because, as I see things, this is a dispute that arose from and concerns not so much a disagreement not about the title (for which WP:ARTICLETITLES applies), but about NPOV with implications for the whole body of the article. I would appreciate it if you would like to share your thoughts, as a Wikipedian much more experienced than me, about the best way to proceed with a view towards resolving this dispute. Best, Ashmedai 119 (talk) 14:00, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If the whole article, or large parts of it have problems, you might request a Good Article reassessment as a first step. The said article has WP:Good Article status, and with WP:POV issues it might not deserve it. Changing large parts of an article is a difficult, rather impossible task, when the topic is sth that invokes nationalist or religious feeling to many people. In any case, the only process that can bring fundamental changes is a move request. You do not need to spend much time with it if your arguments are strong. A single comment to present your rationale would suffice. Editors who would !vote would have some basic knwoledge of the matter, there would be no need to spend a lot of time to respond to every !vote. Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:57, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your speedy response, Ktrimi991. The problem I had in mind that IMO pervades the article and should be first addressed is the way the Rhomaioi are presented throughout its text as "Byzantine Greeks", contradicting even the sources used and referred to in the article's footnotes. Exploring the means available to resolve a dispute, I found out that there is a Dispute Resolution Noticeboard, and I am wondering, diven that the dispute at hand concerns more than just the article's title, whether this Noticeboard would be a preferable venue to raise the issue (compared to the requested move process or asking for a reassessment of its "Good article" status) and/or a faster way to reach a conclusion. Thanks once more, Ashmedai 119 (talk) 18:10, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Dispute Resolution Noticeboard would not be effective. If you can summarize the problem with one question, WP:RfC could be of help. Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for troubling you with this, Ktrimi991, but I would be thankful if you could please explain why you are saying that addressing the Noticeboard would not be an effective way to reach a conslusion of this discussion. Thanks in advance, Ashmedai 119 (talk) 18:33, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most of disputes taken to the said Noticeboard, al least when Balkan topics are concerned, do not find a solution. It is the nature of the procedure itself that causes that. There you need to convince the other side of the dispute that you are right. On the other hand, RfCs attract much more attention and if uninvolved editors agree with you, the other side of the dispute can do nothing but accept the community consensus. Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:44, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your advice, Ktrimi991. I will now wait to see if any futher concerns exist to be discussed in the article's talk page (it seems to me like all such have been addressed) and will then see how best to proceed. Best, Ashmedai 119 (talk) 06:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I hope every dispute is solved for the benefit of the community. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 07:08, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute Resolution

Just notifying you that I have started a dispute resolution that you are involved in if you want to contribute to the discussion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Nikola_Karev

--SeriousCherno (talk) 22:59, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bulgaro-Macedonians (July 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Numberguy6 was:

This is not the correct place to request new redirects. Please follow the instructions at Articles for creation/Wizard-Redirects. Thank you.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bulgaro-Macedonians and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Bulgaro-Macedonians, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Numberguy6 (talk) 18:45, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ashmedai 119! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Numberguy6 (talk) 18:45, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This barnstar is for you!

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		The Barnstar of Diplomacy is awarded to users who have helped to resolve, peacefully, conflicts on Wikipedia. I am sure that, besides me, t h e o t h e r s too could agree that your efforts in resolving disputes in on least three separate article talk pages, should be recognized. Thank you! - ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ \| contribs ✎)} 17:16, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is very kind of you, SilentResident, and I welcome your kindness. Please do indulge me, though, in noting that though I try to be polite in my dealings with others including conversations on this website, I do not think that diplomacy is a concept most apt in describing the desirable approach in the resolution of disagreements that may arise; diplomacy, in my understanding, is a process aiming to reconcile differences, with no regards to the justice of the demands of one or other part. My (brief) experience here suggests that disagreements usually derive from an inadequate study or appreciation of availabe sources that relate to the matter discussed or from unexamined and false premises that render agreement impossible. I hope that my talk page comments aid towards the removal of such obstacles between disagreeing parties. Please do not think that I mean this as diminishing my appreciation for your kind gesture and please accept in return my sincere thanks, Ashmedai 119 (talk) 19:01, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't intending to reply, but what you said just reminded me of a venerable Mediator from the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard, here in the English Wikipedia, who although wasn't familiar on the subject, they were quick in understanding it and managing to actually improve the article in spite of the unfortunate hurdles the dispute has caused to it. Maybe you should consider the role

. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 01:20, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I really appreciate Ashmedai's work. It is a frank and well-informed effort. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:13, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Souliotes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albanian. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Bulgaro-Macedonians

Hello, Ashmedai 119. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bulgaro-Macedonians, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Bulgaro-Macedonians

Hello, Ashmedai 119. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Bulgaro-Macedonians".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:01, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Odysseas Androutsos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roumeli.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Stefanos Kasselakis.

Greetings, Ashmedai 119. Regarding your reversion of my edit, you have cited Kasselakis affiliation to the Republican Party using an article from https://www.thepresident.gr/2023/10/12/i-schesi-toy-k-kasselaki-me-toys-repoymplikanoys-kai-tin-alitheia-grafei-o-kostis-lympoyridis/. This can be proven as fake. The website provided a fake zip code and address for Kasselakis. This can be proven by checking the current voter records. Other than that, ESTIA has already deleted the article where they claimed that Kasselakis was a Republican. I do not see an trustworthy source (such as Kathimerini, CNN, News 24/7) claiming something about Kasselakis being in the Republican Party. I ask you to please check again if he really was a member of the Republican Party. Lidistat67 (talk) 16:16, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Markos Botsaris has an RfC

Markos Botsaris has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Jtrrs0 (talk) 12:31, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Georgios Kountouriotis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albanian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:04, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fotos Tzavelas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fara.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Battle of Meligalas

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Meligalas you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of PearlyGigs -- PearlyGigs (talk) 11:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Battle of Meligalas

The article Battle of Meligalas you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Meligalas for comments about the article, and Talk:Battle of Meligalas/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of PearlyGigs -- PearlyGigs (talk) 12:24, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Slavic Orthodox churhces

Hello Ashmedai 119,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Slavic Orthodox churhces for deletion, because it's a redirect that seems implausible or is an unlikely search term.

If you don't want Slavic Orthodox churhces to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:45, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]