User talk:Pyraechmes

These are the most historical people of Kilkis prefecture!! Don't you know them? Read a book then. Wou could read wikipedia, instead but as I see, wikipedia doesn't allow encyclopedian knowledge.

Stop it

Please stop changing "Macedonian" to "Slavomacedonian" mechanically. This is not what we call the thing here on Wikipedia. We stick with common international terminology, like it or not. Your edits will be reverted. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:30, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If you engage in further inappropriate behaviour in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I undestand. Anyway this article is completely unreasonable. It is sipmple propaganda. It needs a lot of corrections if we want to show the truth. What's the point of refering to political parties that represent languages. We reverse the the insane to reasonable here. Do we want to inform or to create facts, usefull for extra use of extremistic interests?

The point about refering to that party is that it's notable, simple as that. Whether you like the party or not plays no role at all. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:46, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That means that we don't loose the chance to make propaganda activities in any case even in an article about languages. Your answer is an acceptance of the aim of the article.

We write about a party of 2.000 voters, and in the same time we don't write about the ethnic identity of 200.000 Slavic speakers in Macedonia, which are Greek. That means tha 1% of slavic speakers in Greece are maby your "Macedonians". Which is the article of us? The 198.000 slavophone Macedonian Greeks and our dialects? Maybe it is some other articles in another encyclopedia?

Just think of what I wrote. I think there are a lot of changes that have to be done yet, in order to reach the truth. And remember: If this is an article for the languages spoken in Greece by minorities, then it refered to 2.000 speakers in Macedonia and 30.000 speakers in Thrace. So an addition should be done in order to cover the languages spoken by 200.000 Greek slavic speakers, who don't belong in any minority, and they are always forgoten by everyone (even the Greek goverment). I write these because I am a Macedonian and my origin is of a slavic speaking area. And ofcourse I am Greek like the majority (99%)of the slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia.

And by the way, has the problem with the international name of FYROM been solved? I think UN, NATO and EE still searching for a name. Does wikipedia solved the problem by its own? And if we accept that the name of the country is Macedonia, the ethnic people of these nation should they just be called Macedonians? The three million of Macedonians (like I am) in all over the world, that they are Greeks, how should they be called?? Who decided that before 1992 I was Mecedonian and now I am Greek/Macedonian? Wikipedia? The historical names of the people should not be changed according to the political proceedures. Especially in scientific essays, such as an article in an encyclopedia. And how are we going to call the Macedonian dialects of the Greek language? Did wikipedia decided this, too? If a person reads this article, which the conclusion would reach? Will he be informed for what is Macedonia? Will he understand who were the Macedonian Fighters in the Macedonian Struggle? I think that he will propably confuse the facts. Is this the purpose of wikipedia? To declare the thesis of one side, no matter if this is wrong or right, and no matter if this confuses the readers? When I put the word "Slav" near "Macedonian" is for explanation without reducing or changing the meaning of the article. Why do you believe that this consists a problem? Chrusts 00:04, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Macedonitic dialect

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Macedonitic dialect, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

The article's title is a neologism. The works cited in the reference section do not support the article content. Reliable sources on the topic of Greek dialects do not touch on a specifically Macedonian dialect of Greek.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Aramgar (talk) 23:22, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Karaiskakis.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Karaiskakis.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 11:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Sionidis Michael.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Sionidis Michael.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 11:28, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:G Karaiskakis Vogd.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:G Karaiskakis Vogd.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Sionidis M.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Sionidis M.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:M Sionidis.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:M Sionidis.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Sionidis Michael.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Sionidis Michael.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Sionidis.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Sionidis.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Swma Karaiskaki.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Swma Karaiskaki.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note

I think I've seen you several times using the curious word oddment [1]. Please note that this word does not exist in English. I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but probably it's remnant or remainder. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! I think you are right. I mean remnant. Maybe remnant is the right word. Thank's!Chrusts 08:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Macedonians (Greeks)

I nominated the article for deletion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Macedonians (Greeks). Cheers!--Yannismarou (talk) 10:50, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the reasons I expose in my thread in the AfD page, where you can respond. My main question is this (besides the fact that you present the history following only the Greek version of the story): What does this article adds to the Macedonia (Greece), and Macedonia (region) articles? IMO, nothing as it is now. It is just a WP:POVFORK.--Yannismarou (talk) 11:09, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the characterization "nationalist". Before starting editing an article, search a bit the background. For instance, why it was chose to be redirected? Or have you possibly thought what collateral effect such an article would have? Have you read this thread?--Yannismarou (talk) 11:35, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have in mind that the redirect was created in 2006 by a Greek user, and for three years nobody touched it. Doesn't that say anything to you?--Yannismarou (talk) 11:41, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Να τσεκάρεις το mail σου.--Yannismarou (talk) 11:47, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ΟΚ. (αν και διαφωνώ)Chrusts 11:52, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greece Invitation!

	You are cordially invited to join WikiProject Greece
	You appear to be someone that may be interested in joining WikiProject Greece. Please accept this formal invitation from a current member of the project.
	If you decide to join the project, please add your name to this list.
	I hope you accept! - Yannismarou (talk)

--Yannismarou (talk) 12:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 11:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 11:32, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstood this message. You are supposed to add those ~~~~ signs after your comments on talk pages, like here. Not in the edit summary box of your article edits. In the edit summary box, you should write a short note about what your edit does. Oh, and by the way, did you intentionally configure your signature in such a way that it only displays "Chrusts", without a link to your page? That's not a very helpful signature. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:01, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do I make a link to my page?Chrusts 22:04, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

If you haven't changed anything in your user preference settings, the ~~~~ signs should automatically produce something like:

[[User:Pyraechmes|Pyraechmes]] ([[User talk:Pyraechmes|talk]]).

(i.e.: Pyraechmes (talk).

If you want something different, but still with a link, you can edit the code in the "Signature" box in your user preferences. For instance, you could say:

[[User:Pyraechmes|Chrusts]] ([[User talk:Pyraechmes|talk]])

That will produce:

Chrusts (talk)

(If you do that, you also need to turn on the checkbox underneath that field in the preferences form, which says "raw signature".) Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:20, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Macedonian dialects

Zdravo. Kako si? I have assumed that from your talk page, that you speak the "local Slavic" dialect. Ot dea si ti? Depending upon where you are from and what dialect you speak you may be interested in helping out at one of these pages. Na koj dijalekt zborish? PMK1 (talk) 13:55, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok, i just assumed from what you had written that you spoke this dialect along with Greek. As for editing the Macedonian dialect of Greek or something to that extent, I do not have enough knowledge to edit the article. As for the dialects spoken in Greek Macedonia you will find that they are the same language just north of the Border. There is very little diference between the local dialect spoken in Kilkis and Gevgelija. The same goes for Florina and Bitola. Just a question, why do you believe that the language spoken in Florina, Edessa etc. cannot be the same language spoken in Bitola, Prilep and Štip? What is your linguistic logic, from the amount of Macedonian that you know? PMK1 (talk) 10:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The official language is much different, but it is a formal language. The majority of the villages throughout Macedonia always spoke informally (and still do!), they contracted words, they shortened sentences etc. This also happened throughout the Republic of Macedonia. However all of the dialect's words were based on the original longer word, this is why many people from south of the border from villages find the language so different. My family is from Western Macedonia, our native dialect is as different to Standard macedonian as are the dialects spoken in Kilkis, Solun and the Lower Prespa region. The dialect spoken in Florina is actually closer to standard Macedonian then my own! The Standard Macedonian is different from many dialects (this is what you are calling "language of Skopje") BUT, the Spoken Macedonian is virtually unchanged and is still spoken by the majority of people. The majority of people actually do not speak the standard language, the majority use the local dialects. The same is the case south of the border. The linguistic features of the dialects in Greece are similar to those directly across the border. PMK1 (talk) 10:37, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Vangelis Natsis.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Vangelis Natsis.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 08:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dimitris Semsis

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Dimitris Semsis, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://wiki.phantis.com/index.php/Dimitris_Semsis. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 15:09, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Anastasios Polyzoidis

A tag has been placed on Anastasios Polyzoidis requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. T3chl0v3r (talk) 20:49, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Polykastro. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. PMK1 (talk) 00:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism is that you did by deleting facts. What's the problem with my editings? They are all written in historical records.Chrusts 07:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

This article is about the town Polykastro. You keep putting back information about other villages and people, it is not relevant. Add that in those specific articles. You really have misinterpreted this article. We dont say "vlach-slavic" (megleno-romanian and macedonian), nor do we use Non-common usage. I suggest that you read about some of the Wikipedia practises before editing. I would be happy to help you, just lay off the WP:BOLD until you understand the project better. PMK1 (talk) 13:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 17:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

If you want to attract any attention to what you edit in a talk page, be careful: when you want to open a new section, place it at the end of the talk page, and not uuuup at the beginning! Nobody is going to read you! And I think it's time to start properly signing your posts! Τα λέμε!--Yannismarou (talk) 19:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok.Pyraechmes (talk) Chrusts 19:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fearmongering.

You do realise that the most recent comments left by you on my talk page are quasi-scaremongering tactics. Unless you plan on contributing to this project from a WP:NPOV then you should reconsider your stay here. My patience with you has run out. Please do not contact me again, on my talk page, unless you have an actual issue to raise. PMK1 (talk) 11:59, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POV

Pyraechmes, please, provide reliable references about your strange statements, that the slavophone Greeks are not from Slavic origins, but from Hellenic origins. The article Grecomans clearly says: Grecomans (Bulgarian: Гъркомани, Garkomani, Macedonian: Гркомани, Grkomani, Romanian: Grecomani, Albanian: Grekomanë) is a pejorative term used in Bulgaria, the Republic of Macedonia, Romania and Albania for Greeks of real or perceived Arvanite, Aromanian or Slavic origin.... If no, I will revert you. Jingby (talk) 10:25, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Famous Macedonians (Greeks)

All those you are deleting appear in the list of Macedonians (Greeks). Aren't those born in Macedonia, Macedonians? Especially if that's what they say about themselves. You can expect me to find out the history of each ones grandparents to have them included in a Trivia section(!) Shadowmorph ^{^"^} 10:31, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not just about native Macedonians. Shadowmorph ^{^"^} 10:33, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should find their origin. When we edit famous Pontians, they must be Pontians. The same with the macedonians. I made a short clean up in the list of Macedonians (Greek). If we want to state that there are Greek Macedonians, so world people will be informed of this, we have to be very carefull. The article for Macedonians Greeks has this purpose. Off course some residents of Macedonia may claim that they are macedonians in a regional way, but the Macedonians must have a continuous connection with that land. I believe this how these articles must be. There are some Cretans, Pontians, Mikrasiates, Konstantinoupolitans, Thracians etc that live in Macedonia but they can't be considered as Macedonians, at least not in the level of origin.Pyraechmes (talk)) Chrusts 10:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For me if someone is Greek and e.g. is born and lived his whole live in Thessaloniki and says he is Macedonian, then he is Macedonian. But whatever, it is just a trivia section. Shadowmorph ^{^"^} 11:44, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Only warning

The next time you make a comment like this, I will block you. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 23:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too late, he's been indefinitely blocked by another admin. Can't say I'm going to miss this editor. I note that the talk page above is full of warnings and copyvio notifications, which suggests that this was a block waiting to happen. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:55, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I regret for what I did. My purpose was to be sarcastic and not offensive. I will be careful in the future and I will not make such comments again. I am sorry for the block evasion but I didn't knew that I was against the rules of WP, since I am new in WP. I will not make socks in the future, again. I believe that my block was very strict. I would be grateful if you unblock me. Thank you, Pyraechmes

Decline reason:

Sorry, you don't deserve to be here if you think "Jew-Magyar-Americans" isn't going to be offensive. This nonsense is more than enough for me to deny you outright. Take some more time off, and learn why the copyright violations are also unacceptable. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Ok, I shall wait. As you wrote, it was nonsense. I didn't mean to offense anyone. I apologise if I caused problems. Thank you anyway. Pyraechmes (talk))Chrusts 11:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I request to unblock me, please. I have regreted for what I wrote. I am sure I can be better in the future. Thank you. Pyraechmes

Please include a decline or accept reason.

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Can you explain to me the reason why not? Chrusts

Brand New Request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

It's been a long time sinced I was blocked because of my behavior. All this time I thought about it and I really can't find a rational reason why I had acted like an idiot. I hope you will have allready forgive me because my attitude is too much different all this time and it will such, in the future, too. That's why I ask you to reconsider my block again. Thank you anywy, Pyraechmes

Please include a decline or accept reason.

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

It's been a long time sinced I was blocked because of my behavior. All this time I thought about it and I really can't find a rational reason why I had acted like an idiot. I hope you will have allready forgive me because my attitude is too much different all this time and it will such, in the future, too. That's why I ask you to reconsider my block again. Thank you anywy, Pyraechmes

Decline reason:

After the comments you made, certainly not. Come back in a few months. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:10, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

What comments?

Can I come back?

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please accept my apology and let me in. I hope you forgive me. Thank you, Pyraechmes

Please include a decline or accept reason.

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Can I come back?

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please, review your decision for my ban. I hope you will examine my request for coming back. Thank you, Pyraechmes

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Sandstein 06:20, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please, review your decision for my ban. I hope you will examine my request for coming back. The reason I was banned was that I made very offensive comments about a user, and I was accused for racism. I understood that my ban was fair because I had a very bad attitude against another user. My intentions are, from now on, to be useful in the community by contributing articles and not causing damages or disruptions. Thank you, Pyraechmes

Decline reason:

Peron Jayson below, you should consider asking ARBCOM for a review at arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org. NJA (t/c) 11:03, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

IF you are unblocked (by no means implying that you will be), I would very much like to see you avoid editing in areas related to Macedonia, FYROM, Greece, Israel, Palestine, and Judaism. Would you be willing to consent to such a topic ban if you were unblocked, with the understanding that violations of said topic ban would lead to additional blocks? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:35, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would be very difficult for me, not to write about Greece and Macedonia, since it is a subject I know very well and I can make useful contributions in history or geography on these areas. It is like forbidding someone to write in his first language. For the other topics (FYROM, Palestine, Israel and Judaism) are not in my interests anyway, and I don't have any intentions to write about topics, I am not informed well. In fact, I never wrote about Israel, Palestine or Judaism. I only wrote some articles on the Greece-FYROM common interest. User:Pyraechmes

This block seems to be under the purview of the restrictions laid out at WP:ARBMAC. As such, you may contact the arbitration committee directly by using the arbcom-l mailing list. The email address of that list is noted at WP:ARBCOM. You can ask them to review your case. --Jayron32 06:56, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for coming back (Jul11)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Can you please check again my ban? I think that you know now that I am not the guy, you banned. I am much mature now and I have been adjusted to the rules. I've read all this time the regulations and I know now what aggression does to the users and to the scope of wikipedia. Ill try to be a usefull user. Thank you anyway. With trust, User:Pyraechmes

Decline reason:

As your block was under ArbCom reg's, a simple admin cannot unblock you. Please contact ARBCOM for a review at arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:55, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Unblock request by user in my el.wiki page

Pyraechmes asked me in my el:Συζήτηση_χρήστη:Magioladitis#block:Greek talk page for instructions of how to get them unblocked. The user has been blocked 3 years ago, they are currently active in Greek wikipedia and seem to want to come back in the English one. Their behaviour in Greek Wikipedia looks OK with no conflicts. Their cooperation with non-Greek editors in the Greek wiki also looks OK (check for example: el:Συζήτηση χρήστη:Мико.

Any opinions on that? Should The ArbCom been contacted? What are the steps that should be followed? -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:09, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I left a message to User talk:Saturn star but they haven't edited since April. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:15, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Check FocalPoint's coment in User_talk:Magioladitis#Request_for_unblock_user. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:49, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

It's been a every long time, I am blocked. Still contributing in Greek wikipedia. I have regreted for my bad comments, and I would like to participate again in english wikipedia following the rules. I hope you will examine my request. Thank 's anyway, Pyraechmes 26 May 2012

Accept reason:

Unblocked per my comments above. If another admin thinks that unblock is undue please reblock immediately. If my unblock violates an ArbCom decision which I was not aware of please reblock. If Pyraechmes makes highly offensive comments please reblock. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:47, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peter Ichko, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macedonia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:43, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Balkan people

Sultan's Firman from 1680 lists clearly the ethnic groups in the Balkan lands as follows: Greeks (Rum), Albanians (Arnaut), Serbs (Sirf), Vlachs (Eflak) and Bulgarians (Bulgar). Greeks and Aromanians were not the same people during Ottoman times. In 1905, after long struggle, the Sultan recognized the Aromanians officially as separate nation with its own Church, schools etc. Jingiby (talk) 05:35, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent move of Ahmet Hacıosman

An editor has proposed undoing your recent move of Ahmet Hacıosman to another title. See WP:RM/TR. If you object to restoring the original name, you can respond in that discussion. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 02:22, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Not a good idea to return to mindless revert-warring over Macedonia-related naming issues so soon after being let back in from an indef block. This area was all nice and quiet when you were away. I would like to keep it that way. Explain why you want that disambiguation, on the talkpage. I'm evidently not the only person to whom it just makes no sense at all. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:01, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Making spurious accusations of "lying" against other editors is also not a good idea, for a person that was unblocked under conditions like yours. May I suggest you read them again? Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:31, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moving pages without gaining consensus first

Sorry, but why did you move the Belasica page to a new title without trying to gain any form of consensus on this? What is more, you did so claiming there was evidence on the talkpage. However, the last comment there is from five years ago and no comments from you are there to be seen. Please, try and discuss moves that might be controversial prior to performing them. Thanks. --Laveol ^T 03:34, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Moschochori, Florina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bulgarian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:27, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Seleucus I Nicator, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Europos (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Provisional Government of Western Thrace, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Gypsies and Turkish (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 14:20, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Provisional Government of Western Thrace, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gypsies (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 20:32, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kilkis (regional unit), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Oaks and Paiko. 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) 09:00, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sarakatsani

You've been here long enough to know the situation with the Manual of Style and the discretionary sanctions in that topic area, Pyraechmes. Are you going to follow wikipedia policy or not? Dolescum (talk) 12:35, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You'll note I linked to all the relevant policies when I reverted you, Pyraechmes. Are you going to follow them, yes or no? Dolescum (talk) 01:45, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sitaria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macedonia. 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) 09:03, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Balkans, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

April 2015

Please stop adding unsourced content. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:35, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You need to learn what reliable sources are. Of the three websites you added, one is a private, self-published website run by some poet, while the two others explicitly say they have used Wikipedia itself as their source. What you need is sources published by reputable academic linguists or historians. Also, you need to learn that we here on Wikipedia run things based on discussion. The discussion is ongoing at Talk:Voras Mountains; if you think you have something to say about the matter, go there, before you continue reverting. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:57, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another, unrelated note: When dealing with article names of Greek locations etc., please remember that we have a project-wide standard of how to transcribe Greek names, at WP:GREEK. There would otherwise be multiple different ways of transcribing these, and for the sake of consistency across the project it's not a good idea for editors to just move articles around to whichever of these they happen to prefer. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:57, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see ANI where an important discussion is occurring. Johnuniq (talk) 22:58, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for lacking sufficient competence to edit. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

—Kww(talk) 01:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I allways try to contribute usefully for wikipedia. I get unfair attacks instead. Specific users heckle me. I put more sources than my prosecutors. I don't understand the block. I don't understand why there is no discussion. User:PyraechmesWe were here before you came and we will be here after you leave 20:43, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You make this edit in which you grammatically destroy a perfectly fine sentence, then complain to the Village Pump for being warned about it? I agree with the WP:COMPETENCE issue here. Stick to the Greek Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:32, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

The ANI discussion that I mentioned above is now archived here. Johnuniq (talk) 10:07, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Krya Vrysi wasn't found in 1930. It was a village for some centuries. In 1930's it became a town. I tried to correct the sentence, because it is a lie and unsourced. Maybe my english is not good enough. Is this a reason for such a block? Is it racism to not english people? User:PyraechmesWe were here before you came and we will be here after you leave 20:43, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No, it is not racism. Your English can be of any level, so long as you are competent enough to understand the concerns of other editors. It seems clear from your complaints that you are unable to understand very basic messages on policies, and this will make it difficult for you to contribute. You'll need to indicate how you will address this problem, instead of claiming racism. Kuru (talk) 00:23, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I really undestood the concerns of some editors. But I think they are not fair to me. They judge my intentions, without knowing them. I really don't want to cause troubles. I follow the policies. I try to understand the rules, but some times I feel like trying to prove I'm not an elephant. My contributions aim in inproving the articles. When I see unsourced sentences, I try to correct them. Sometimes this is characterized as "bullsheet". When other users add unsourced material, it is considered as "acceptable" and when I change it, I am the "bad guy". The whole discussion sterted when someone started adding "attacks" in my talk page. I didn't want him to bother me, and I didn't want talking with him, because I realised he was quarrelsome. I didn't want to "put oil in the fire" just to avoid causing problems in the community. That's why I tried to call the admins to keep him(or her) away from me. Instead, they blocked me as "ruffler". Please answer to me. Can you understand my situation here? User:PyraechmesWe were here before you came and we will be here after you leave 16:58, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would appreciate if you reconsidered the reasons of my block and unblock me. I didn't have intentions to cause problems and I 've always been sincere here. If some users believe that I cause problems to them, I promise it will not happen in the future.We were here before you came and we will be here after you leave 20:56, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I see no indication that you understand what the problems are, or how you would change your conduct to address them. Huon (talk) 21:53, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

What do you mean? User:PyraechmesWe were here before you came and we will be here after you leave 23:10, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please reconcider my block. My previous lack of sufficient competence to edit, should not be irreversible. I am an old user in two laguages and I have edited a lot of articles. I have organized an international convention for the 10 years of wikipedia. Sometimes I am in the middle of conflicts but I always find a solution to all affairs in cooperation with the other users. I really believe I deserve another chance. I please User:Kww to give me his email, in order to write to him, or send me to chrusts@hotmail.com. I just please the administrators to spend a few minutes of your time, to think about my request.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pyraechmes (talk • contribs) 11:29 am, 31 December 2015, last Thursday (5 days ago) (UTC+1)

Decline reason:

As already explained to you, in order to be unblocked, you have to show us that you understand and accept the reason for which you were blocked. You seam like not understanding it. If you are not able to understand the reason for your block, then you would repeat the same behavior if unblocked. Vanjagenije (talk) 01:40, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Can someone explain to me what that answer suppose to mean or is it just a robot-answer? User:Pyraechmes We were here before you came and we will be here after you leave 05:29, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Pyraechmes. 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]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Pyraechmes (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please reconcider my block. I really think my block was fair enough since I was unable to contribute extensively in English Wikipedia. I shall begin with easy and short verifiable editings, only in matters of well known subjects in order to avoid adverse effects on the reliability of the operation and conflicts with the community

Decline reason:

You've been having problems for years and years. There's been substantial concern as to your competency, especially around your level of understanding of English. Specifically, admins have expressed concern that you seem unable to read and write English and this means you are unable to understand our policies and guidelines. You have clearly shown a lack of understanding of our policies and guidelines. The fact that you couldn't write an unblock request without spelling and grammar mistakes shows to me that this hasn't changed. Yamla (talk) 13:40, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please, do not be quite strict on spelling and grammar mistakes. Blocking a user for that reason, isn't it inordinate? User:Pyraechmes We were here before you came and we will be here after you leave

By itself, no. But given that there have been problems with your edits stretching back more than eight years, it's important to judge your competency now. And, honestly, I'm unconvinced that it's any different from the last time you were free to edit. I'm of the opinion if you were unblocked now, you'd just end up blocked again in a few days or weeks. You are, of course, free to request another admin review your block. --Yamla (talk) 19:57, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First, I am grateful for your reply and secondly I 'd like to say that probably you are right. Perhaps, it's better for me, to try to convince you some other time, when I will be more ready. User:Pyraechmes a user from Greece' 20:13, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]