User talk:Skylax30

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Skylax30. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Aristophanes68 (talk) 15:33, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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 that 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.

Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:46, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything about the article Souliotes.

Your recent editing history at Article 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. Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:54, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you stop those threatening-looking messages please? I am one of the editors and I am supposed to be part of the "concensus", if there is any. Of course I discuss everything. Go now to the discussion and explain please, what's the relation between Zagori and Souliotes. Thanks.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Greek National Awakening, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greek. 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) 09:59, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Τον Μάιο, πρόσθέσες αυτή την αναφορά στο άρθρο Θεσσαλονίκη:

Α.Ι. Θαβώρης, "Θεσσαλονίκη - Σαλονίκη. Η ιστορία του ονόματος της πόλης", στο "Η Θεσσαλονίκη", Κέντρο Ιστορίας Θεσσαλονίκης, Δήμος Θεσσ/νίκης, 1985, σ. 5-21.

Δεν έχω καταφέρει να βρω αντίγραφο. Μύπως θα μπορούσες να μου στείλεις κόπια; [email protected] --Macrakis (talk) 17:04, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ΟΚ. Νομίζω πως θυμάμαι πού βρήκα αυτό το βιβλίο. Βρίσκεσαι στη Βρετανία;--Skylax30 (talk) 17:11, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Τα έλαβες;--Skylax30 (talk) 18:03, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Skylax30. 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]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ——Chalk19 (talk) 22:39, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Talk:Panayiotis Diamadis. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:13, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Battle of Broken Hill has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Bahudhara (talk) 22:49, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at noticeboard of discussion regarding pers attack. The thread is [[noticeboard of discussion#User:Skylax30|User:Skylax30]]. The discussion is about the topic User:Skylax30. [1] Τζερόνυμο (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:33, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Swarm ♠ 23:23, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Swarm, is it a common practice in WP to block someone for unclear reasons, such as "personal attacks" without links to the event(s), and for a non-defined period? Thanks for the answers. I would have some questions for possible personal communications of the admin with certain users of greek WP, but these are probably confidential.--Skylax30 (talk) 09:45, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Checking your block log [2], you were blocked for 48 hours. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:04, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User:Beyond My Ken.--Skylax30 (talk) 18:32, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• If you truly don't know why you were blocked, then there's a serious competence issue for which you will most likely end up blocked indefinitely. It should be extremely obvious that you were blocked pursuant to the ANI report for personal attacks. The links were provided there, and petty procedural objections such as me not providing you links are not valid, as you were aware of the report. Also, I know full well that your block log shows up when you try to edit while blocked, so you had the information as to when the block would expire. It's either completely disingenuous or completely incompetent to claim that you did not know how long the block was, because that information is always available even if we don't include it in the blocking template. Swarm ♠ 18:44, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Turkish Cypriots 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 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. Moxy (talk) 11:41, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message User talk:Moxy. I was the one who added the sourced text that Tzeronymo is deleting. I suppose you checked the sources. Discussion and concensus is always welcomed, provided that there is good faith on both parties. Anfortunatelly, this is not the case with Tzeronymo. First he asked for "back-up" by sending message to a turkish-speaking user, and after they congratulated each-other for the "good job" [3], Tzeronymo was claiming that his position is a "concensus" and, therefore, he can constantly delete the text. The assisting user is supporting his opinion by citing an irrelevant article in an obscure turkish-cypriot blog, plus some personal unintelligible arguments. I believe you are an old user, and you know that we don't need concensus to expand an article with a text that is very relevant and well-sourced with academic sources. Otherwise, the articles could be written after voting. If however, the Tzeronymo's part is insisting that this text should not be in the article, THEY have to take the case to Disp. Resolution. --Skylax30 (talk) 18:55, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jingiby. I noticed that you recently removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 06:26, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will explain in the discussion. Symmetrically, if someone wants to include this content, he is expected to explain the reason. Thanks. --Skylax30 (talk) 06:35, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mporeis na apeuthinthis stoys stewards tis wikipedia an theoris ypervoliki i adiki tin fragi stin elwiki, yparxei kai to globalcommunity tis wiki episis an thelis na thesis tetoia zitimata, h elkoinotita den einai i anoteri arxi, ostoso prepei na stirixis tin thesi soy me epixeirimata, oi prosvoles poy eipes den tha se voithisoyn alla nomizo oti h epivoli tis fragis 3 minon os ekdikitiki gia tin sigkekrimeni periptosi kai i omadiki stoxopoiisi apo xristes poy xrisimopoioyn analogoys xaraktirismoys mporei na apodeixtei. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4F9:2A:166B:2:0:0:3 (talk) 07:06, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Efcharisto, alla den kaigomai na grapso stin ellinikh WP. --Skylax30 (talk) 09:21, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Άλλωστε, όπου κι αν πας η Ελλάδα σε πληγώνει [4].--Skylax30 (talk) 10:46, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reported here. Ktrimi991 (talk) 10:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Arvanites (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
• disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. FITINDIA 12:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Souliotes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Arvanites (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

You've been reported for edit warring at WP:AN3. Can you reply and explain why you should not be blocked? I also notice you are currently blocked on the Greek Wikipedia. Any offer to negotiate, or proposals to use WP:DRN or WP:RFC would be welcome. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 16:33, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks EdJohnston. I suppose I can explain here, no? Actually I didn't understand that I violated the 3RR. If it is true, it happened while I was adding text and sources in the article while others kept on deleting. To be honest, I don't quite understand how this rule works. However, if I really violated the rule, I will not waste anybody's time with excuses. Formalities aside, the point is that 3 or 4 users are protecting a particular (pro-Albanian) POV in the article and prevent its development. As far as the Greek WP case, I was blocked for 3 months, which is a far too long block, for allegedly "annoying" a user, and on accusations that are obviously wrong for anyone who can read Greek. I complained to the administrator, and he did not reply. I don't want to bother you with more explanations, but the "hot" topic was that a typical leftist polemic language and insults against the Church was included in an article, and the "sources" were a user's interpretation of certain leftist sites. I expressed my opinion that I was blocked for political reasons, and nobody bothered to reply or to see the case. Do you mean that I can use WP:RFC or DRN for the case of the Greek WP?--Skylax30 (talk) 21:50, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

EdJohnston Though I haven't examined the 3rr issue, I don't find this summary of the dispute by Skylax to be accurate, having been tangentially involved myself. He is right that this is a Greek-Albanian issue. However, on those two pages I saw Skylax reverted by at least 6 users (myself, Resnj., Ktrimi, Tzeronimo, Jingiby and Fut Perfect). While an uncharitable view seen above might accuse all six of "protecting" some Albanist POV, the fact is that Skylax added WP:SYNTH using sources that didn't appear to mention Souliotes, the article topic. Well if he is willing to srv, abide by rules including avoiding and assume good faith, I hope he will do so, in the spirit of cooperation. Its not impossible that he could in the future make useful contributions to the topic areas of Souliotes and Arvanites, but the behaviors that led to this need to change.---- Calthinus (talk) 22:32, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Skylax30. You've been warned per the result of the AN3 complaint. You may be blocked if you make any further reverts about people of Albanian descent (such as Souliotes and Arvanites) unless you have received a prior consensus in your favor on the talk page. Consider using the standard methods of dispute resolution. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 01:58, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning EdJohnston. I didn't know the policy of Discr. Santions. However, in the relevant page [5] it says "Pages relating to the Balkans (Macedonia)". Does it include all the Balkans (and Greece of course), or just Macedonia? If it means all the Balkans, I propose that all other users involved in the Arvanites and Souliotes articles, should be warned. The policy is not unidirectional, I suppose. If this is the case, to my understanding, they should not do reverts about Greeks without consensus . I am not expecting you to answer this question, as I bothered you enough already. I will see where can I brink this question. Cheers.--Skylax30 (talk) 05:52, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:ARBMAC, "Topics related to the Balkans, broadly interpreted, are placed under discretionary sanctions." As regards notifying others, you are the one who is in trouble and WP:DR gives good advice. Another admin might have just gone ahead and blocked you without further ado, instead of issuing a warning. I did not notice anyone else whose warlike behavior put them at risk of a block. EdJohnston (talk) 13:09, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you have ignored my warning by going ahead with an edit about the Souliotes, even though in another article. Please explain why I shouldn't go ahead with a block of your account. EdJohnston (talk) 17:13, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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 that 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.

--NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:39, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Skylax30: regarding your question on NeilN's talk page: the Ds Alert that NeilN left you here already contains a link with the answers to your questions. To repeat: that decision is here. Quoting from it: The area of conflict in this case shall therefore be considered to be the entire set of Balkan-related articles, broadly interpreted. For the context of that statement, see section #Findings of fact. I hope that answers your question. Mathglot (talk) 06:32, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That was great. Thanks.--Skylax30 (talk) 06:33, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Per the original complaint filed at AN3 and your continuation of warring about the Souliotes since then. See above on your talk page as well as User talk:EdJohnston#Skylax30. EdJohnston (talk) 18:00, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you understand that Koutsonikas' work writing about his own personal experience falls into wp:PRIMARY source. It's better to have a view offered by modern scholarship, else this section will become a mess of numerous old opinions. Anyway the fact that they were bilingual is already confirmed by recent scholarship.Alexikoua (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Posts in hortative and scary "warnings" will be deleted. Anyone interested in reading them, please look in the history of this page.--Skylax30 (talk) 10:25, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jingiby. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 07:30, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good. Please explain in the relevant page, why Jovan Musacchi is baptised "Gjon" in Wikipedia.--Skylax30 (talk) 07:34, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your addition to my collection of accusations against me for being pro- and/or anti- this or that ethnicity and/or nationality. From before I have been labelled anti-Turkish and pro-Greek, also I seem to have been vandalizing Albanian articles since I am a Turkish Muslim according to this. I have also Slavic propaganda on my conscience here. Your addition of "pro-albanian and anti-hellenic POV" is a logical extension. I am actually quite proud of this record. It seems to indicate that my edits may actually be rather neutral. --T*U (talk) 07:39, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your appreciation. I've been around WP enough to know who is doing what in articles related to albanian myths. Btw, don't care about ignorants' comments. If you were Turkish Muslim, you wouldn' have reason to vandalize Albanian articles.--Skylax30 (talk) 10:47, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but you are missing the point. Your "pro-albanian and anti-hellenic POV" is just as way off the mark as the other's. But I will not sink as low as to put labels on your comments... --T*U (talk) 11:10, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, take no offence. Balkans is a small place and we know each other.--Skylax30 (talk) 12:12, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just as well that I live far away from the Balkans and have no ethnic or national connection, then. --T*U (talk) 09:27, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Today we have "trans-national spaces".--Skylax30 (talk) 10:53, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice to undertake the initiative to create an article about him. I'll be happy to help you on that if you need additional bibliography.Alexikoua (talk) 12:51, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me, Alexikoua. Lambros Koutsonikas --Skylax30 (talk) 12:18, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You previously participated in discussions of the title of the Gjon Kastrioti article. The issue is again under discussion here if you care to participate. —  AjaxSmack  17:22, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I probably should not be writing this message to you, but it appears that you are being played out by Albanian editors again. If original name is what they are looking for, then perhaps you should be a gentleman and direct them to the documents collected by Jovan Radonić.[6][7] There is a letter from 25 February 1420, personally written by Ivan Kastriot himself, on page 2 of the provided source.[8] There he signs himself with the following words:

Vera moja gospodina Ivana i moih sinovĭ vsakomu trĭgovcu...

— Jovan Radonić, Đurađ Kastriot Skenderbeg i Arbanija u XV veku, page 2

Of course, Albanians can always deny Ivan Kastriot's sanity, apart from his name. Maybe he did not know his real name, or did he? I would also like to give you a warning that the usernames Τζερόνυμο and Resnjari are one and the same personality, maybe also Bbb23. There is a lot of Albanian immigrants in Greece who eventually learn Greek. Since this is only the internet and anyone can take any identity, you should stay on alert about the possible socks. Anyhow, I wish you good luck! Cheers.

All the above sources are known. I don't think that Tz. is the same physical person with R., and I don't mind if they/he/she are/is. For the moment I enjoy seeing self-identified leftists supporting NATO geopolitics and nationalism in WP.--Skylax30 (talk) 06:42, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The use of modern scholarship as reference offers in general solid clear arguments and none can question the validity of the text you insert. In the case of Souliotes for example I have plenty of reference that describe Perraibos' personal experience with the Souliotes. Pardon me but I believe an old 1800s Lear isn't of academic value compared for example to Vranousis & Sfyroeras. Though they may be some copyright issues to send you pdf copies of recent works send me a wiki-email so as to direct you about enabling access in some useful library databases.Alexikoua (talk) 18:08, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, content you added to a Wikipedia article appears to be a minority or fringe viewpoint, and appears to have given undue weight to this minority viewpoint, and has been reverted. To maintain a neutral point of view, an idea that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article about a mainstream idea. Feel free to use the article's talk page to discuss this, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 06:48, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is an opinion of yours, and its correctness has to be proven. Don't edit articles according to your subjective opinion.--Skylax30 (talk) 07:02, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced the passage from the leading to the appropriate section per Wikipedia undue weight policy. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 07:18, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Jingiby. We should continue discussion in the Talk Page. Τζερόνυμο (talk) 07:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Go and dicuss.--Skylax30 (talk) 07:37, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There were some Albanian songs about the Souliotes by the Orthodox Albanian speakers from Northern Epirus who adopted a pro-Greek pov in the past.Alexikoua (talk) 13:38, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source, User talk:Alexikoua  ? --Skylax30 (talk) 13:41, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P. Ruches offered an analysis in this work [[9]]. They are not so many as the Greek ones, for example the "Τρία πουλάκια κάθονταν" is only partly in Albanian. By the way this idiom contains several Greek loanwords, words such as Simea (flag), eleftheria (freedom) are part of the lyrics.Alexikoua (talk) 13:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(deleted one notification about blocking. Reason: Too much colour).

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 12:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for edit warring, have been blocked previously. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of 18th – early 19th century sources on Souli and Souliotes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of 18th – early 19th century sources on Souli and Souliotes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ktrimi991 (talk) 19:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits reveal a good understanding of wp:RS and wp:NPOV. If you want to contribute further in the specific subject I can provide you tons of academic material. Recent scholarship by western scholars has written Illyrian archaeology from scratch. The cold-war era stereotypes of so-called continuity have been long demolished.Alexikoua (talk) 17:49, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interesting to provide your input here [[10]].Alexikoua (talk) 08:04, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User talk:Alexikoua. That article has multiple problems, incuding users behaving like owners.--Skylax30 (talk) 19:30, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Turco-Albanians; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is ...
2. Do not .... Thank you.Resnjari (talk) 11:29, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank YOU. Can you paste here the link to "edit warring". As far as I know, I expanded the article with some new material and academic source, you reverted for first time today, and I restored it 1st revert. Let's see who is "edit warring".--Skylax30 (talk) 11:43, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't template me! Everybody makes mistakes, and this user finds user warning templates impersonal and disrespectful. If there's something you'd like to say, please take a moment to write a comment below in your own words.

I 've been around for about ten years. Thanks.--Skylax30 (talk) 19:26, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings dear Skylax30. :) Cinadon36 (talk) 17:41, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

thanks.--Skylax30 (talk) 19:12, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just wonder why you both are so closely...ehhm related from the very beginning here. Just looking at each other's contriblog it makes me wonder that [[11]][[12]].Alexikoua (talk) 17:06, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I only gave to Cinadon36 a few lessons when he was new in WP (then as Tzeronymo) and he was trying to expand some articles on Christianism in the Greek WP.--Skylax30 (talk) 14:30, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting your addition on the page for Macedonia (Greece). Macedonia is not an administrative region of Greece, it is a geographic and historical region made up of three administrative regions: Western Macedonia, Central Macedonia, and East Macedonia (part of Eastern Macedonia and Thrace). The Ministry for Macedonia and Thrace is not an administrative unit - it is a government agency which helps implement government policy in the regions of Macedonia and Thrace (i.e. Western Macedonia, Central Macedonia, and Eastern Macedonia and Thrace). If you insist on reverting it, I will seek further action for disruptive editing. --Michail (blah) 13:54, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK mate. It's all yours.--Skylax30 (talk) 13:56, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PS. I just noticed that you characterized my edit as "vandalism". Not that I mind, but I advise you to open a dictionary.--Skylax30 (talk) 13:59, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I requested that no templates be posted here, especially threats about supposed "edit war".--Skylax30 (talk) 09:42, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't want to be templated, don't edit war. It's not hard ... --Calthinus (talk) 18:14, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back to WP:ANI/3RR. --Calthinus (talk) 18:32, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Gjon Kastrioti. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:16, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

YOU are edit-warring. Just leave the paragraph open to development. Or refer to the proper place of WP.--Skylax30 (talk) 10:53, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Skylax, please follow Wikipedia:Dealing with trolls. No need to pay attention to false alarms.Alexikoua (talk) 12:51, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't. This "alarm" is common from the "we are all Albanians" people.--Skylax30 (talk) 17:31, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your next block for edit warring is likely to be indefinate. Please use the talk page on Nationalism rather than edit warring -----Snowded ^TALK 19:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't edit war. You said something about "poor english" and "dubious" content. I tried to improve english by quoting almost exactly the source (btw "Don't criticise poor English", WP:NNS). Did you check the sources and found them "dubious"?--Skylax30 (talk) 19:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The sources were poor and its not clear if what you want to do passes a test of relevance. If you really think those additions have validity then make a caase on the talk page - do not edit war. You have had various blocks so if you haven't learnt from those you next block is likely to be permantent. -----Snowded ^TALK 19:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nationalism in the Middle Ages is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nationalism in the Middle Ages until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Cinadon36 12:23, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New year's greetings and Hello

Thanks again for your previous article support, and the same brings me back to you once again, with request for some more support. This time @ Draft:Turkish textbook controversies while other sections too need expansion and citation support, I am also looking for support @ section Draft:Turkish textbook controversies#Depiction of Greece.

Please do visit the article and help support article expansion as you can. Thanks and warm regards Bookku (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(one message deleted) May 2021--Skylax30 (talk) 16:52, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Even though you haven't violated Wikipedia:Edit_warring#The_three-revert_rule, you are still edit warring, trying to make changes without discussing on the talk page. If this behaviour continues, I'll be reporting it to admins. Try to make your arguments in the talk page first. And if that doesn't work, there is Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Bogazicili (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not wasting my time discussing about myths. --Skylax30 (talk) 19:43, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Slavery in Africa has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 15:33, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Execution of 42 policemen in Achaia (Greece, 1944), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Execution of 42 policemen in Achaia (Greece, 1944) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Cinadon36 20:07, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Aoös (Greek mythology)—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Louie (talk) 00:37, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Louie (talk) 00:37, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply] 

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) 00:27, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pls have a look here. [13] Cinadon36 12:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1102603767. Cinadon36 22:57, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bullying message deleted.

I don't want to receive threats for blocking, sir/madam. You'd better participate in the discussion and stick to the sources. Message deleted.

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) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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) 12:32, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]