User talk:Cplakidas/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher

G'day Constantine, if you are free, would you mind taking a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher and maybe providing a review? It has been open since 27 May and has only received one review. I would like to review it for Adam, but as I helped copy edit the article during its GA review, I'm probably ineligible now as a reviewer. It is the first article that Adam has sent to A-class review and it would be a shame for it to be closed with only limited input. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:19, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations

		The Military history A-Class medal
		On behalf of the coordinators of the Military history WikiProject, I hereby award you the A-Class medal for your outstanding work on John Troglita, Al-Mundhir III ibn al-Harith and Abbasid invasion of Asia Minor (806), promoted to A-Class between May and June 2012. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:26, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Ian, I definitely plan to keep on ;) Constantine ✍ 11:33, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

resource request - July 8

Hi,

I've uploaded one of the articles that you requested on Byzantine Heraldry at WP:RX. You can find a link to the article on that page. Best, GabrielF (talk) 20:38, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Cplakidas. You have new messages at WP:RX.
Message added 16:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 16:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Re:

Hi Konstantinos. When I originally added that source, I was looking at another work that cited the article. But I believe it is available at one of my local libraries so give me about a week and shoot me an e-mail and I'll have the pages scanned and ready to send to you in PDF. All the best,--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 16:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks, but it seems that I was awarded one in 2010 by Kedadi(although I didn't remember the incident).--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 14:32, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

• Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:12, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

"Death dagger"

Howdy Constantine. I was wondering if you could take a look at the discussion going on at the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest. The discussion pertains to the typographical dagger and its usage for Varus. An ideal would be to have a vote somewhere, probably at the wikiproject so the issue is solved in the grand scheme. We wouldn't want an edit war! Cheers! I hope all is well. --Tataryn77 (talk) 23:19, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

resource request - siege of constantinople

Hi,

I've uploaded two of the articles that you requested at the resource exchange. You can find a link to the files at that page. Best, GabrielF (talk) 02:03, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Mystras

Hi. You might be interested in expanding my new stubs of Category:Mystras. The last one I thnk might be confused with another in Istanbul. Can you look into it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:16, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello Doctor! I'm a bit busy with my articles on the Byzantine-Arab wars at the moment, but perhaps you'd like a shot. Probably the best source on Mystras is Runciman, whom you can find on scribd. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 16:38, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Siege of Kamacha (766)

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Siege of Kamacha (766) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:15, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Yarmouk

You have put a reference on a note in your changes to the article. Since the notes are after the {{Reflist}}, that reference will not show up and generates an error at the bottom of the article. Please fix it.Naraht (talk) 21:53, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I went about fixing it, but then decided on removing the ref and the numbers altogether. The source is an MA thesis, and hence probably not up the the level required for such a contested article. Constantine ✍ 21:59, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Didn't realize it was a contested article. My area of concentration on wikipedia is Fraternities and Sororities (fairly far away...)Naraht (talk) 00:32, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		Thanks Cplakidas for helping to promote Siege of Kamacha (766) to Good Article status. Please accept this little sign of appreciation and goodwill from me, because you deserve it. Keep it up, and give someone a pat on the back today. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 08:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Much appreciated! Constantine ✍ 09:31, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Siege of Constantinople (674–678)

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For outstanding work on Siege of Constantinople (674–678). You are a fine specimen of a wikipedian! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I started Zuqnin Monastery. Perhaps you can find more scraps about it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:59, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar, coming from you, it's a special honour! I'll have a look and see what I can find on Zuqnin. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 14:10, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Rumoridus name

Hi Constantine. I just noticed the change from Flavius Rumoridus to Rumoridus. I always take the names from PLRE, and in it (PLRE I, pg. 786), his name is described as Flavius Rumoridus. Where PLRE does not name the individual as Flavius (see Varronianus (son of Jovian) and Valentinianus Galates as examples), then I have removed Flavius from their name. I think we should follow how Rumoridus is named in PLRE. Thanks. Oatley2112 (talk) 12:42, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello Oatley! I know what PLRE does, but in this case it is clear that "Flavius" is not part of the actual name, but a honorific assumed with the consulship. It certainly does not imply any membership in or descent from the gens Flavia, especially as the name is patently Germanic... Cf also the fact that the Italian version omits the "Flavius", as do most references to him in books. The issue has come up in the past and is a frequent misunderstanding with late Roman office-holders. I can't refer you to a specific source on this right now, but see Al-Mundhir III ibn al-Harith#Succession and early career. Constantine ✍ 12:50, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you about the use of the name Flavius as an honorific rather than as a real name, I am just cautious about going against the PLRE, given its authoratative status. I also note that he is referred to as Flavius Rumoridus in Bagnall and Cameron's Consuls of the Later Roman Empire, pgs. 340-341 (noting however that they are probably following the PLRE in any event). However, given the lead sentence in the article still refers to him as Fl. Rumoridus, I can live with the change to the article's name. Cheers. Oatley2112 (talk) 13:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Siege of Tyana

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: Byzantine-Arab Wars

Hi Constantine,

I already know that any time I want to find an excelent article to translate all I have to do is take a quick look at your contributions. :D I took a pause on that region and period, but I'll go back to it sooner than later.

Me and pt.wikipedia already "owe" you at least 5 feature articles (pt:Guerras bizantino-árabes, pt:João Curcuas (general), pt:Tomás, o Eslavo, pt:Emirado de Creta and pt:Bardanes Tourkos; the latter is on the main page now) and 5 good articles (pt:Nicéforo Urano, pt:Andrónico Contostefano, pt:Miguel Bourtzes, pt:Sulayman ibn Hisham and pt:Maslama ben Abd al-Malik Ibn-Marwan; the latter will be classified today).

Thank you very much and keep up the excelent work.

Regards --pt:Stegop ^talk 19:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Fantastic job

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your spectacular work on Sayf al-Daula and numerous other medieval Muslim figures. Keep up the great work! Al Ameer son (talk) 19:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, it is very much appreciated, especially coming from you. I'll definitely keep it up! Constantine ✍ 19:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I can't read or write Arabic unfortunately, so I'll be of no help regarding Arabic sources. However, I just found a number of books that could be used to expand the article in a quick search, including the "Cultural activities" section, as well as future articles on the other Hamdanid rulers. These probably won't suffice for mass expansion, but hopefully they're of some use to you. I'll try to find some more in the coming days and maybe start some draft pages for the other Hamdanids and the Abbasid family governors of Syria and Iraq who preceded the Hamdanids.

• The Composition of Mutanabbī's Panegyrics to Sayf Al-Dawla.
• Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature, Volume 1. Describes the eventual falling out between al-Mutanabbi and Sayf ad-Dawla as a result of the former's enmity with Abu Firas as well as a list of over a dozen literary figures and philosophers under the patronage of ad-Dawla.
• The Making of Byzantium p. 334. An interesting summary critiquing Sayf ad-Dawla's rule.
• Encylopedia of Islam Entry on ad-Dawla pp. 73-74.
• Cambridge History of Egypt. Mentions agreement between ad-Dawla and Ikhshidid before the latter's death and ad-Dawla's marriage to Ikhshidid's niece.
• The Buwayhid Dynasty in Iraq. Actually a very informative book on the Hamdanids in general that could be used to create articles on Sayf's predecessors and successors. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:52, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I had my eye on a couple, and Whittow's The Making of Byzantium is already used, but the others are new, and useful. If you happen to find anything else, please let me know. I also intend to expand upon the Hamdanids, so here's to a fruitful collaboration! Constantine ✍ 01:20, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Sayf al-Dawla

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Nasir Dawla

Started a draft page for Nasir al-Dawla here. Feel free to expand it and please verify what I already added since I'm not completely sure I read the sources correctly, particularly with Nasir al-Dawla's defeat in Baghdad at the hands Tuzin. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:49, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Hah, I just now posted the beginning of the article, when I was notified of your message! How do you suggest we proceed? Originally I had intended to flesh out the account by using Canard's summary in the Encyclopedia of Islam, as well as Kennedy, and then add whatever details I could find elsewhere. Do you want me to retract the posted portion and work on it in your draft space until it is completed, or do you prefer that we both work on it simultaneously? Constantine ✍ 23:06, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Wow. Your article is much more comprehensive and detailed than the draft. If there's anything in the draft page that's not in the mainspace article, I'll move it then delete the page. We'll just work on the new article. Great job by the way. --Al Ameer son (talk) 00:05, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Cplakidas. You have new messages at [[User talk:WP:RX|User talk:WP:RX]].
Message added 20:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 20:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Rawadids

Hi. I removed the speedy tag on this page. I did that because I couldn't see a page move discussion under way at the page you proposed to move, so I can't tell if this is a simple uncontroversial housekeeping deletion or not. --Dweller (talk) 08:42, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

thank you!

"the usual through job" - thank you!! Thank you for improvement advice too! Secretlondon (talk) 17:01, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors: Wikimania 2012; special projects note Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Australian 25th Battalion Interview: Article writers discuss buildings and fortifications Op-ed: Hawkeye7 reports on a weekend workshop

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 09:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Από το πολύ σεκλέτι...

Is this Ρεντικουλέ (talk · contribs) guy the same as the one who was obsessed about the "Byzantine" White Tower the other day? This time he gets extra points for inventiveness in sock naming, but I'm losing track of who is who. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Probably, the MO certainly is he same and there's a definite continuity of edits (and sock impersonations). It's not as if there's anyone else interested in the topic, especially in such a manner... Constantine ✍ 07:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Sa'd al-Dawla

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:04, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

MoS: "Russo-Turkish" vs. "Russo–Turkish"

Hey, Constantine, my apologies for the title changes of articles about the Russo-Turkish Wars. I've seen the error of my ways, but actually am still kinda confused about the whole situation.

Also, there are still various instances of "Russo–Turkish" within the articles listed here (this time not put there by me). Could you clean those up, too, or should I do it? – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 15:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

No need to apologize, I too needed lot of trial and error before getting it straight (and am still hazy about some cases, and not too convinced it's worth the trouble, either). Just fix them as you see them, I don't think it matters unless an article goes for GA and such. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 15:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

South Slavic tribes

I think Category:Sclaviniae‎, Category:Slavic tribes in Macedonia‎ and Category:Slavic tribes in Thrace and Moesia‎ should be merged into Category:South Slavic tribes. Sclaviniae is the same as "South Slavs" (Antae-East Slavs, Wends-West Slavs), it is a political term for the nominally Byzantine territories settled by Slavs. As "tribes" gives away that these were peoples in the Early Middle Ages, there is no need to have a "Slavic tribes in [Roman province]", and sometimes these tribes lived on the territory of several provinces which were fluctuating (and btw, why have "Thrace and Moesia" in one category). What do you think?--Zoupan 23:49, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, not quite. "Sclaviniae" has a very definite political and historical connotation as Slavic tribal areas associated with the Byzantine Empire. Not all South Slavic tribes formed Sclaviniae, and not all tribes in Macedonia and Thrace did so either, and there were Slavic tribes and Sclaviniae in southern Greece as well. Category:South Slavic tribes is therefore the parent category of a series of sub-categories with their own peculiar characteristics. "Thrace and Moesia" is probably meant to include the "Bulgarian" tribes, although indeed the division is a bit arbitrary.Constantine ✍ 06:24, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Papazantopoulos article

G'day mate, have just left a message for "The Woob" (User talk:The Wobb) about the article Giannis Papazantopoulos and thought I should let you know because I deleted your prod. The article is not a bio of a living person and does have refs (though without a better understanding of the topic I couldn't tell you whether they are independent, legit, sufficient, etc). Can you have a look at the article now that it has had a bit of a clean-up? If you think it still doesn't meet WP:N, WP:REF or WP:SOURCES then I have absolutely no problem with you adding a new delete prod. Cheers, Stalwart111 (talk) 00:21, 10 August 2012 (UTC).

Indeed, not a BLP. My mistake, I suppose that happens when one edits late at night ;) Thanks for the notice! Constantine ✍ 06:26, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

All good! Really wasn't clear to begin with. Have seen your new prod and if you are correct then I can't help but agree. Needs to go. Cheers, Stalwart111 (talk) 06:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC).

+ the one link provided as a ref (by the original editor) is not a reference at all. Could even consider a speedy delete prod. Cheers, Stalwart111 (talk) 06:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC).

DYK for Nasir al-Dawla

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Excellent work, nothing new there then..♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Constantine ✍ 12:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Constantinople

Ciao Costas,
I hope that you are doing well without military service! In June, I lost again, and was brought to Sicily, but sooner or later I will manage to come to Athens :-) Question: there is a fellow Wikipedia who in the article about Constantinople today added a couple of sentences about a fire in 1197. I have on three sources a list about fires in the City, and this fire in mentioned nowhere. I am not questioning the existence of the fire, which is well referenced, but personally i don't think that it deserves to be mentioned in the general article about the City. To me it looks like more an excuse to link the article that this guy wrote. What is the opinion of the Princeps Byzantinist :-) of wikipedia about that? Alex2006 (talk) 17:41, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello Alex! Nice to see you again! On Con/ple, yeah, I think you're right. I've trimmed the new additions down a bit. And you're always welcome if you decide to drop by! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 18:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Costas! I look forward to it, hoping that our two homelands will survive. Otherwise we can only emigrate to the City, you in Phanar, myself in Galata. :-) Alex2006 (talk) 18:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Fourth Fitna

Orlady (talk) 16:03, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

resource request - Arab-Byzantine frontier

Hi,

I've uploaded an article that you requested at the resource exchange on the Arab-Byzantine frontier. You can find a link to the article on that page. Best, GabrielF (talk) 07:01, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Question

Hallo Costantine
a fast :-) question: the word "Aya", used in Turkish versions of Saint names and places (ex. Ayastefanos, Aya Yorgi, Ayakapı, etc.), is Greek? The provenience is clear (from "Hagios"), but what I mean, is it a Greek word (maybe from a Rum dialect of Constantinople) or is a Turkish alteration of "Hagios" (i.e. it has been turkicised)? Due to the fact that has no gender, I am for the second hypothesis... Alex2006 (talk) 09:13, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello Alex! I am not certain. It could come more directly from the feminine form Hagia, which in colloquial Greek would be pronounced "Aya", but for all intents and purposes I would consider it a turkicized word after 500+ years of usage. Constantine ✍ 10:21, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I also asked to a fellow turkish Wikipedian, and he also does not know 100%. Maybe is an Italian word :-) Alex2006 (talk) 10:29, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Forum of the Ox

Hallo Constantine,

thanks a lot for correcting the article about the Ox! I have a question: are you able to identify the "Patrician Nicetas" who built the bath near the forum? I remember that another Patrician Nicetas in the same period sold an house in Psamateia that was used to host the nuns in Gastria monastery. Müller-Wiener calls him "Eunuch", but I am not sure that he speaks about the same person, since he sets the building of the bath 100 years before. It would be nice to identify him. P.S. As soon as I have sometime, I will write also something about the Forum Amastrianum. Alex2006 (talk) 09:27, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Funny, I was already intending to look into this Niketas. I have some suspicions as to his identity, but the name is rather common and cannot promise anything conclusive. I'll have something by the end of the day, though, and I look forward to the Αμαστριανός φόρος! Constantine ✍ 11:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, the only eunuch named Niketas in the period in question is the future Patriarch Ignatius, but it is rather unlikely that he was responsible for this bath. There are a few other people of the same name who might fit, but no eunuchs. I have Janin but not Mamboury, does he say anything more about him? Constantine ✍ 11:25, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Aha, there's also Saint Nicetas the Patrician, who was also a eunuch. Perhaps it is him.Constantine ✍ 11:29, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Not funny, it is called telepathy :-) . I point to your discovery too (BTW, that article was not there this morning: I wonder who wrote it :-)) I have to check Müller-Wiener again: maybe I read wrongly the century. Anyway, he is the candidate number 1... Another question: how do you consider the Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium? I got a "Gutschein" from my company for books, and I was thinking to buy something Byzantine (again)... :-) Alex2006 (talk) 15:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Telepathy indeed ;) On the ODB, it is an excellent work, but I can save you your money: do you want it in 3 parts or one and navigable? I don't really know what to recommend to you, you already have most books on the City, and a very large number of older works can be found after a relatively short search online (otherwise feel free to email me). I don't know whether it's in your field of interest, but if I were to buy a Byzantine-related book, it would be the superb Byzantium in the Iconoclast Era, c.680-850: A History. Constantine ✍ 16:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I can't believe it :-( This means that very soon none will publish anything in the world, except us on Wikipedia. :-) About the book which you advised to buy, I am going to pick up it this evening at the Zentral Bibliotek, thanks! :-) As a little Dankeschön, look at this link (if you don't know it yet). After that, we don't need to go to the City anymore. :-) BTW, we don't know whether your Nicetas built also the bath at the bous, correct? Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 14:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Constantine, thanks for correcting the article about the Amastrianum. Are you sure that Basil the Copper Hand came from Thracia? Janin calls him Basil the Macedonian, and your article says that he was born in Macedonia. Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 12:29, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. I think, though, that "Macedonia" here means the theme of Macedonia, which is in Thrace. I'll check it out and correct it where necessary. Constantine ✍ 12:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I've modified the article on Basil to include both options, and rephrased the portion about him in the Amastrianum. I hope to get my hands on Kazhdan's article on him and tell for sure. Constantine ✍ 15:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! You did a great template, and there are still some red spots on it :-) Alex2006 (talk) 15:36, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, he is simply mentioned in Kazhdan's original work as being "from Macedonia", but Kazhdan himself leaves the question open: "происходил из македонских (или фракийских) славян и служил империи как наемный воин", i.e. he came from the Macedonian (or Thracian) Slavs and served the Empore as a hired soldier". Therefore let's leave it at that. BTW, wow what a Socialist jargon-laden article this is, although no wonder considering when it was written... Constantine ✍ 16:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

If the situation continues so, those times will come back soon... :-) BTW, today I went to my office, and noticed that nearby a new Greek shop opened: the owners are at least 80 years old. We started to talk, and he told me that he came from Saloniki. I asked if his family was from there, and he told me not really: one part came from Ayvalik and one part from Kumpkapı in Constantinople. I answered, you mean from Kydonies and Kontoskalion. Well, they invited me for lunch... And then some people says that culture is worth nothing! :-) At lunch he told me wonderful stories about his grandfather, who during the first WW was a spy (not for Greece, but for some Greek secret society which was pursuing its own foreign policy) by the Ottomans in the City, and could escape one day before being hanged... One of the many little stories which together make History. Alex2006 (talk) 17:22, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Saint Nicetas the Patrician

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

GA review for Nasir al-Dawla

Hello, Cplakidas. I'm reviewing the article on Nasir al-Dawla, and will subsequently review the article on his nephew Sa'd al-Dawla. I reviewed your articles on Constantine Lekapenos and his brother quite some time ago; I will not take nearly as long to complete this one as I did those two. dci | TALK 21:34, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Nikephoros Phokas the Elder

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Abdallah al-Battal

Hello! Your submission of Abdallah al-Battal at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 21:29, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Nasir al-Dawla and Sa'd al-Dawla

I've passed both articles and will try to post them as GA's as soon as possible; I am satisfied by your responses to my comments on Nasir al-Dawla and found hardly anything to comment on with regard to Sa'd al-Dawla. Excellent articles! dci | TALK 01:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for taking the time to review them both. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 05:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations again!

		The Military history A-Class medal with oak leaves
		On behalf of the coordinators of the Military history WikiProject, I'm pleased to award you the A-class medal with oak leaves for your work on the Abbasid invasion of Asia Minor (782), Battle of Solachon and Siege of Constantinople (717–718) articles, which were promoted to A-Class between May and August 2012. Nick-D (talk) 11:21, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Nick! Constantine ✍ 16:14, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the legacy of World War II Op-ed: Bomzibar on German military history

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 00:44, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

		The Islamic Barnstar
		For Abdallah al-Battal. It's always a pleasure to see articles addressing the systematic bias (i.e. articles on non-Western topics). I enjoyed reading this one, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated :). Sadly, early Islamic topics are in a rather horrible state in WP. Constantine ✍ 06:36, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Names

I removed the Iranian theory of the surname as an ethnonym because it was rather superfluous and reductive to highlight one single possible theory among the countless ones that could derive from the word arya. It's a simple view based on 2 lines from a 1968 work that deals tangentially with the Arianiti family. On the other hand I tried to be as inclusive as possible with the wording on David Arianites based on Shuteriqi's work and even on Arianiti family, where I've expanded all issues regarding that surname my work is still reductive as Shuteriqi wrote about 10 pages just on that surname. I don't have the time to look into the wording on David Arianites (until Thursday), but see if you can generalize the name subject.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 17:37, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, well, it is rather strange how the Iranian theory of origin is "superfluous" but the Albanian one is not ;) Personally, the latter seems the more dubious of the two. I don't have access to Shuteriqi, but I figure that the argument goes like this (correct me if I am wrong): a) the Arianiti were active in Albania → hence they possibly had Albanian-Illyrian origins and b) they may be related to the 11th-century Arianitai → who therefore may also have an Albanian-Illyrian origin. This line of reasoning is rather circuitous and includes major "ifs" which, although plausible, cannot be proven either way, and I suspect the same of the linguistic arguments as well (the summary you provide at Arianiti family is not very helpful in this regard). On the other hand, "Arianites" is typical Greek for an "Iranian" person and hence a far more straightforward hypothesis. Given that Polemis is not simply "a 1968 work that deals tangentially with the Arianiti family" but one of the major prosopographical studies on late Byzantine families, his opinion carries weight. BTW, do you have access to the original source Schramm used for his assertion? Clearly someone else made the hypothesis of the Albanian origin, not him.

Anyhow, as we are deep in hypothetical territory re the name issue whatever theory we look at, there are two options: write a detailed section on every single theory, or mention them briefly in summary. The article on David Arianites currently does the latter, IMO rather well and without taking sides on the issue, and is hence rather satisfactory. In addition, in view of the hypothetical nature of the Arianitai-Arianiti connection, I feel it would be wrong to give the issue too much important there. Constantine ✍ 21:35, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Then you figure incorrectly. Polemis may be a a major prosopographical source on late Byzantine families, but this is a work about the Doukai and 2 lines on the Arianiti make it tangential. It is superfluous because of all the placenames/demonyms/ethnonyms that it could be related (if we accept the arya derivation theory) to we're highlighting one that connects it to Arriane. The other plausible theory is the word arë. Btw what's the source of Polemis?--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 18:46, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Well since I have the actual book and you probably don't please allow me to reserve my own opinion: the main focus are the Doukai, but all related families who intermarried with them are also treated. So tangential or not, it is a relevant opinion voiced by a recognized authority on prosopographical issues. And I still don't see why we should remove the Iranian but keep the Albanian theory, especially given my concerns above (if we are going to debate this further, I'd seriously like a summary of Shuteriqi or, if you can manage, some scan sent to my email). The arya derivation theory may produce any number of names, and I really don't know enough to take a view on the Arianiti, but in Greek, the form "Arianites" is pretty specific: the "-ites" suffix always denotes origin. Ah, and Polemis cites Heinrich Moritz, Die Zunamen bei den byzantinischen Historikern und Chronisten 2nd volume. Constantine ✍ 19:02, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

That's an old source and I didn't say that we should remove it, but it should be generalized as any derivation is plausible. How about something along the lines of the section of the Arianiti family article?--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 17:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

(unindent)Btw would you say that this sentence refers to missionaries from actual Roma or from Nova Roma[1]?--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 22:22, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I am mostly OK with what you write at Arianiti family, but with one proviso: given that the connection between Arianites and Arianiti remains uncertain, this should be made as concise as possible. On the DAI reference, no, the Greek text says "Rome" clearly enough. Constantine ✍ 07:06, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

(unindent)I think it's concise enough, but feel free to reedit it. My edit would be a re-edit of The family is hence variously considered to have been of possibly Albanian[2]or Iranian[3] origin. along the lines of Based on these etymologies differing theories regarding his origin and birthplace have been produced.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 13:21, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Al-Fadl ibn al-Rabi'

Hello! Your submission of Al-Fadl ibn al-Rabi' at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yazan (talk) 04:39, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Abdallah al-Battal

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Transcription: English-to-Greek

Hi Cplakidas, I found your name on the Translators available list. There are two transcriptions for Darlene Conley in the Greek Wikipedia: Ντάρλιν Κόνλεϋ (article) and Ντάρλιν Κόνλεϊ (redirect). Which one is correct? Or can I use both? Cheers --217.186.99.13 (talk) 04:46, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello! Both are correct in as far as they are the same phonetically. In earlier times, Κόνλεϋ would have been favoured as it is a more accurate transcription, but for the past couple of decades, with the tendency toward (over-)simplification, Κόνλεϊ would probably be more popular. IMO, as far as correct transliteration practice is concerned, you should favour Κόνλεϋ. Constantine ✍ 06:05, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed explanation! (I'm impressed by your knowledge.) --217.186.99.13 (talk) 13:11, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

My pleasure. It's nothing special, you could ask pretty much any Greek user for such things. Constantine ✍ 13:27, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 08:50, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Al-Fadl ibn al-Rabi'

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Milhist coord?

Constantine, one of the requests at the coord election page is for more coords to cover diverse periods and regions. Being a coord might help you focus some attention on Byzantine articles. Interested? - Dank (push to talk) 14:59, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello Dank! I was thinking about it, TBH, but I don't really understand what being a coord is about (I've generally tried to avoid getting involved in wiki-bureaucracy and the job description is a bit vague), and how being one could help in focusing more attention on Byzantine (and Arab, Turkish etc) matters. Otherwise, I would definitely be interested. Constantine ✍ 17:02, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Mainly, it involves occasionally closing an A-class review, saying "me too" when we give someone an award, and minimal reviewing, at your choice of PR, A-class, GAN or FAC. And saying wise things every now and then on our main talk page. Coordinators don't have any real power, but we do have visibility, which may or may not provide visibility for the kinds of articles you're interested in. - Dank (push to talk) 17:43, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I see, something like the IOC then, without the millions of dollars and other bribes in kind (or are there?). All right then, let's do it. I can't promise particular wisdom, but I'll do my best. I see you and a few other veterans are in too, so it should be an interesting team. Constantine ✍ 18:37, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Welcome aboard. Voters will know you from your A-class and Featured Articles, I think, they shouldn't need much convincing. - Dank (push to talk) 18:41, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for nominating! Nick-D (talk) 10:22, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

A pleasure to be able to play a part in the project. I probably should have done this long ago... Constantine ✍ 10:29, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

P.S. My description of coord duties was meant slightly tongue-in-cheek ... probably the best place to find out what coords have done is in the nomination statements. - Dank (push to talk) 14:46, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes!! I'm happy you've nominated yourself. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:02, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Bessas (general)

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Byzantine Constantinople Map info request

Hello,

Please see your message inbox regarding map info requests. Feel free also to email at numbers@numbersalive.org as well.

Thank you! TheNumbersLady (talk) 17:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)The Numbers Lady September 17, 2012

Battle of Antioch on the Meander‎

The recent additions to Battle of Antioch on the Meander‎ are a problem. First is the reliability of the source, which I am not convinced of. Second the "purple prose;" and third the combattant numbers. The idea that 2,000 could defeat 20,000 is ridiculous in pre-Modern warfare, whatever the circumstances. It is probable that the figure of 2.000 for the Nicaeans is just the professional core of the army, probably all cavalry, it is quite possible that the total number was considerably higher. However, there is no source which states this that I know of. Urselius (talk) 11:26, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I am aware of D'Amato through his publications on Roman and Byzantine military dress, mostly from Osprey. But I was rather horrified at when I read his books on the Varangians and the Tagmata, where he accepts pictorial or literary evidence wholesale and makes statements about organization etc without referring to any reliable sources. I've let the additions stay until I could check on the accuracy of the source, but I cannot find it anywhere. Anyhow, this "20,000" reference is highly dubious. I've checked Akropolites' account and there is nothing of this, nor of the Chi-Rho (there is a reference to the "sign of Christ" that the soldiers bear, but that is the cross, a rather common symbol that was not used specifically for this battle) Constantine ✍ 15:57, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I used his Varangian book for the photos of important excavated helmets, which do not seem to be available elsewhere, but the use of enamels as proof of the colour of armour is just silly, not to mention the apparent assertion that every axehead dug up in the Balkans was Varangian in origin. I suspect that, with some infantry and the retainers of the kataphracts and Latin knights, Theodore's army was probably 5,000 to 8,000 strong and the Seljuqs somewhat fewer than 15,000, but it would be difficult to prove. At the moment the article reads like the Nicaeans were superhuman. Urselius (talk) 17:12, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I am rewriting the article based on Akropolites' detailed narrative. The Nicaean army is explicitly stated to have numbered 2,000, the Seljuks were probably more, but no clue is given as to how many they were. Sadly, I don't have access to Ibn Bibi, who might be of help here. Constantine ✍ 17:19, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

It is reading a great deal better now. I suspect D'Amato was extrapolating from the figures given for the Seljuq numbers at Myriokephalon and Hyelion, ie. that a major Seljuq army would number 20 to 25 thousand men - a very dangerous assumption. Have you come across any mention of the Turks being disoganised by sacking the Nicaean camp? It is mentioned by Finlay and makes sense of the sudden reversal of fortunes, if the Seljuq's had lost their sultan but were still well-deployed they would have been spurred on to avenge him. Urselius (talk) 08:53, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try to improve it further. Indeed, D'Amato extrapolates generally too much from too little, if you ask me. For the Seljuks becoming disorganized, no, Akropolites mentions nothing. I don't have the other two sources - Choniates' orations and Ibn Bibi - but Macrides usually mentions it when the other narratives diverge from Akropolites, and there is nothing of the sort. Possibly another extrapolation by Finlay, although it is plausible. Constantine ✍ 09:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

This has some good info, including Theodore sending the sultan's body to his son with money for a distribution of alms at the funeral! [2] also this page links to a little monograph on the battle, which includes 20,000 Seljuqs [3] Urselius (talk) 11:29, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Hah, Savvides, of course! I knew I was missing something, I had seen a collection of his articles at a bookshop a week ago, and it contained one on the battle... Thanks a lot, I'll look into them! Constantine ✍ 12:11, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Serbs, Montenegrins and Bosnians in the Greek Revolution (1821)

Well now, there's an article title that caught my eye! This individual's edits are also bound to reveal some surprises. - Biruitorul ^Talk 02:17, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, thanks for bringing this to my attention! Constantine ✍ 07:21, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Would you do a cleanup and write a proper article? I could help but if there's no interest I'll take it to AfD.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 09:23, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I've done a bit of a cleanup, but this needs much research in order to become a good article. I see no reason for going to AfD, however, the topic is clearly notable enough. Constantine ✍ 09:27, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, the topic is most probably notable but the article is mostly a compilation of all the POVs of that user that most of the active users on those topics have had to deal with (some date back to 2010). Personally, I prefer the deletion of a very bad article based on a probably notable topic to the preservation of its public status.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 09:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, the article is not that bad, it suffers mostly from lack of clear internal structure and coherence, whether chronological or other, rather than from the author's evident tendency to glorify the Greek-Serbian comradeship in arms. The latter can be easily dealt with by removing/toning down the more sweeping & exuberant statements (I've pruned it somewhat), the former needs some serious research (which I don't have either the time or the resources for). However it is not a complete trainwreck, at least it provides a reasonable background section and some interesting names with biographical details. Deletion is definitely overkill here, we might as well delete 95% of WP's articles. Constantine ✍ 10:26, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Nahrawan Canal

Hello! Your submission of Nahrawan Canal at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yazan (talk) 06:26, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar

Thank you Constantine for the barnstar and the kind words. On a related note, we once had a GA cooperation on the Umayyad Mosque that revamped the article a great deal but died down before we could finish the work. Perhaps you'd be interested in helping restart it (once we're done with this one, which you are welcome to join, if you're interested in more modern history as well). Best! Yazan (talk) 09:35, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I read through the Umayyad Mosque article, it is really well written. Comprehensiveness of coverage aside, which I cannot judge on, at a glance the article would need only some MOS fixing (standardize use or non-use of diacritics, citation formatting, overlinking, that sort of thing) to meet GA criteria. To me, who up until now had only a very rudimentary knowledge of the subject, the article was very informative. I've marked a couple of places where some more detail would be needed, but that is about it. I am not very much into architecture articles, but if this gets off the ground I'd be happy to hep as I can. On Shukri, I am sadly not knowledgeable enough. I have a good overview knowledge on the region's modern history, but not in that much detail. I can always help with copyediting, though, and will try to look what sources I might have, if you are interested. Best of luck, and keep it up! Constantine ✍ 17:16, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for John Tarchaneiotes

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Nahrawan Canal

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Muhammad ibn Ra'iq

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations

Coordinator of the Military history Project, September 2012 – September 2013

In recognition of your election as a co-ordinator of the Military history project for the September 2012 to September 2013 period, please accept these co-ord stars. Thank you for standing and I hope it will be a fruitful year. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 04:53, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, let's hope I will do them honour! Constantine ✍ 08:39, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Manuel Maurozomes

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Theodore Gabras

Hi Konstantine, although you edited this article a long-long time ago, I believe that we should consider a possible move to 'Saint Th. Gabras', in light of new references.Alexikoua (talk) 21:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Alexi! No, it is not necessary, if he is better known without the "saint" part it can easily be left out. Cf. Theodore I Laskaris, Stephen the Younger, etc. BTW, great work on writing up the article on the Free Besieged! Constantine ✍ 20:52, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Featuring your work on Wikipedia's front page: DYKs

Thank you for your recent articles, including Trial of Erich von Manstein, which I read with interest. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. Let me know if you need help, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 20:39, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Erm, there's probably a misunderstanding here, Diannaa (talk · contribs) created the article. My edits were more cosmetic in nature. Constantine ✍ 20:48, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Siege of Nicaea (727)

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: AustralianRupert on artillery in South Australia, and Nick-D on Venice's empire Op-ed: Nick-D on the "Kokoda: Beyond the Legend" conference

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Catalan dominions

K. M. Setton (Catalan Dominions in Athens) mentions After the Count of Salona the most powerful feudatory in the later history of the Catalan duchies was one Count "Demitre" (also de Mitre!) ... The Margrave of Boudonitza ranks next to the Count Demetrius in the feudal catalogue.. Does any of your (offline) sources mention him?--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 10:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

No, from a brief search I can't find anything. However Setton alone is still very reliable, and there are a couple of other references as well ([4]). Constantine ✍ 14:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I expected more sources to exist for such a topic. On the contrary, I can't even find a proper name for his demesne.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 16:24, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, there is a possibility that his "name" has something to do with Demetrias, but that is just me making a guess... Don't fret too much over it, be glad that we know of such a figure at all. Constantine ✍ 16:28, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, I started it (Demitre) and your guess is plausible [5]--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 22:03, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Bajkam and Tuzun

I would be interested in writing articles on Bajkam and Tuzun, two of the Turkish generals who figured in the politics of the Abbasid Caliphate in the mid-900s. The sources I've found so far have been less than edifying (mainly coin books, useful in some aspects but lacking in any general information); do you have any idea what some good resources would be to turn to? I'm not particularly familiar with this period; reviewing your article on Nasir-al-Dawla got me rather interested in the politics of Baghdad at the time. dci | TALK 01:15, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello! Unfortunately, there isn't too much on Tuzun in modern works except the odd reference here and there, but the Encyclopedia of Islam has a quite thorough article on Bajkam by Marius Canard. I can send it to you if you want (just send me an e-mail address). You could also use The eclipse of the 'Abbasid caliphate; original chronicles of the fourth Islamic century from 1920, which is a good collection of the relevant primary sources in translation. Among more specialist sources, there's the Mémoire sur les émirs al-oméra by Defrémery, dating to 1852, but I haven't been able to find it anywhere, and some info might be found in Le vizirat ʿabbāside de 749 à 936 by Dominique Sourdel (1959). Constantine ✍ 08:44, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I might be a few days in getting started, but I'll make use of the resources you suggested. dci | TALK 03:07, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Great! Looking forward to reading them! Constantine ✍ 10:20, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Nea Nikomedeia

Hi, can you check through this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:06, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Thankyou!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:28, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Moorish Gibraltar

Thanks for the contribution. Nice to see another set of eyes of articles like these. Victuallers (talk) 10:15, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

No problem, it's equally nice to see articles on rather neglected topics like these. Interesting article, I learned a few things today. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 10:19, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; milestone for the Fortifications task force; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2012/Hawkeye7 on mission command Op-ed: The ed17 on how The Bugle could be improved

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 02:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Dude, there was no conquest of Eastern Roman Empire to Bulgarian Empire. After the death of Ivan Vladislav the nobility choose to join the empire, since a) Tsar Ivan Vladislav was related to Basil II and b) since there was no apparent heir and c) the conditions offered by Basil II were beyond excellent. That's all. I'd suggest a change of the title to something like: X-XI century Bulgaria - Byzantine Wars, but it is certainly misleading to claim that there was 50 year conquest. Do you agree? ZomRe (talk) 13:34, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

"Dude", there was almost continuous warfare from 976 to 1018 and Bulgaria was occupied province by province and castle by castle by Basil II. The long, brutal war with Bulgaria with repeated campaigns almost every year is pretty much what he is best known for. The Bulgarian nobility did not suddenly decide to surrender the country in 1018, most of the country had already been forced to surrender at swordpoint, and those who remained were simply too exhausted and demoralized to carry on with the struggle after Ivan Vladislav's death. That is what Skylitzes says, that is what modern historians say, and the term "conquest" is ubiquitous in any book on the subject you care to open. You are the first person I've ever seen to challenge this, and the reasoning is absurd, as I pointed out. So please stop the massive WP:FRINGE and find something more constructive to do. Constantine ✍ 23:38, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Read the talk page, where I've presented specific facts and not generalizations. And please don't edit from your IP, it is too obvious. ZomRe (talk) 02:36, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

What specific facts? Stating that the Bulgarian nobility "joined" Byzantium like that, out of the blue, as if decades of war had not happened, is, if anything, a distortion of facts. And I always edit logged in, so take your complaints elsewhere. Constantine ✍ 11:17, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Question

Hallo Costas,
I hope that everything run well for you (I just read that Greece has now two years time more, that's good). I did not show up, because I went to Cyprus, but Athens is now in the pipeline... I have a question for you: there are problems with Mussolini again: one guy substituted a very well sourced definition of Fascism with his personal opinion ("Fascism is a collection of academic nonsense to give Mussolini and his thugs an excuse to takeover and misrule Italy"), referencing it (after my second revert) with a link to the Enciclopedia Italiana article about fascism written by Mussolini himself and Giovanni Gentile. I asked him to go through the discussion page first, but he keeps reverting...another user yesterday reverted him, but hopelessly. Then I went to an admin, but he did not react. What can I do to go back to the previous definition? Does the 3RR apply in case of POV, OR, and removal of sourced content? Thanks for your advice. Alex2006 (talk) 07:24, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Alex! Nice to see you around (and making some nice trips, too)! In the case of such behaviour, don't bother with direct requests to an admin, but go to one of the noticeboards: WP:ANI, WP:AN3, WP:NPOVN. Constantine ✍ 11:20, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Costas! Actually we went to the Turkish side...Beautiful, but unfortunately in some parts (above all around Kyrenia and Famagusta) totally destroyed with thousands of houses (a large part unsold) built everywhere in the last 3 - 4 years by British "development" companies. It was also sad to stay there, due to what happened in 1974...let's hope that a good solution will be found, the young generation looks open to the dialog. Where we have been (near Cape Andreas, the land's end of Karpasia) there are still some Greeks, and they live in peace with the Turks. It is a beautiful place, let's hope that it will remain so. Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 11:32, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Arab–Khazar Wars

Hi, I spotted that you had only changed round some of the references for Khazar–Arab Wars; I think I have finished the work for you. See Talk:Arab–Khazar Wars.

The category is now also up for renaming at the bottom of the page Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 October 25. – Fayenatic London 20:21, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Bajkam

It's done, just Tuzun to go. dci | TALK 20:19, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your additions, they have helped the article's quality a lot! dci | TALK 18:29, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Glad to help. My thanks for setting up this article in the first place. I am anxiously awaiting Tuzun! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 19:16, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I had an unforeseen load of work to get done in real life, so I won't be able to finish Tuzun today. Thanks again for your help with this article. dci | TALK 21:38, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Nea Nikomedeia

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Greek şerbetçi?

Hi Cplakidas,

• There is a source (link) which presents information about miniature paintings of people on various positions in Ottoman Empire's court. One of people referred to as şerbetçi is described as "a Greek who sells sharbat".
• Another source (link) says that serbetci was a rank in Janissary forces.

Most sources I found say that şerbetçi is man who make and sell sherbet. Is it possible that it was also a position in Janissary forces? What could be a reason to attribute this occupation or position to Greeks? If you need to search sources to reply, please don't bother. Thank you.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:11, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello! While I am not an expert on the subject, Janissary ranks often were related to food (since the Janissaries were supposed to partake of the Sultan's table). For instance, the equivalent of colonel was "çorbaşi", the "soup superintendent". It may be that this was such a rank, or that it was a court position entrusted to a specific janissary. I don't think that this position would be reserved for Greeks or anything. Perhaps the description (assuming that it refers to the same image, I am not entirely clear on that) indicates that the man currently holding the post was indeed a Greek? Anyhow the person depicted in the manuscript is clearly a janissary soldier. I hope that helps. Constantine ✍ 11:37, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I did not know about Janissary ranks being often related to food. I think that probably lead to answer to my question. I also thought that man who currently held the post was accidentally Greek, but just wanted to check just in case. Thank you for your reply.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:51, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Roman Theatre at Apamea

... I'm wondering whether you may be able to find further sources on it? If it interests you, ofcourse. Many thanks! Yazan (talk) 16:02, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar; you definitely deserve one more than I do. I will try to get moving on Tuzun this weekend, as I've been delayed by other matters. Just one question - which source would, do you think, be most informative about him? I have several that mention or describe his actions, but nothing really in depth about his background. dci | TALK 16:03, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, as I told you, the sources I know of don't have much to say. It may be that there isn't much to say, of course, but given his hold over the caliph for two years, this would be surprising. If modern sources have little to say, then I suggest you search the primary ones and use the modern ones as complements. BTW, I've written a short article on the amir al-umara office. Feel free to add anything I may have missed! Cheers and good luck, Constantine ✍ 08:26, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Metropolises

Hi Constantine, although you seem to be quite busy now, I have to inform you that a number of articles related to byzantine era ecclesiastical history have been recently uploaded (Metropolises of Asia Minor: Chalcedon, Smyrna, Philadelphia, Pergamon and soon Ephesus, Caesarea).Alexikoua (talk) 10:11, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Alexi for the heads up, I'll definitely have a look at them. Nice work :-). Cheers, Constantine ✍ 15:44, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the piece you sent, that's really valuable. After some editing I believe the 5 articles can go straight to dyk with a single hook.Alexikoua (talk) 22:53, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I've nominated this series of articles for dyk (+recently the created M. of Nicomedia). If you have alternative suggestions about the hook or any ideas for a picture I'm always open to your ideas.Alexikoua (talk) 05:52, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Byzantine Empire Map

Hey Constantine! Just letting you know there's a movement happening on the Byzantine Empire talk page to switch the Byzantine Empire map to a GIF. There have been many discussions like this before, and the consensus was to keep the map as 565. People are also debating switching to 1025, which has also been discussed before and rejected. It seems these discussions happen annually! Just giving you a heads up!--Tataryn77 (talk) 17:14, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Siege of Constantinople 717-718

Hi Cplakidas. First of all, congratulations for your very well done articles, I'm translating a lot of them on it.wiki! Can you explain me better the double joke of Leo III? Some users on it.wiki find this sentence not much intellegible: "inoltre, dato che il generale arabo non aveva ricevuto nessuna notizia del doppio gioco di Leone, non devastò i territori dei temi Armeniaci e Anatolici, perché credeva che i governatori di tali temi fossero ancora i suoi alleati" (I guess you understand italian a little, since you made some edits on it.wiki, anyway this is the original text: "In addition, as the Arab general had not received news of Leo's double-dealing, he did not devastate the territories he marched through—the Armeniac and Anatolic themes, whose governors he still believed to be his allies.") Zero6 stated: "Comunque, nel paragrafo successivo, non ho capito bene qual'è il doppio gioco di Leone: essersi impossessato di una città che gli arabi avrebbero voluto comunque donargli può essere considerato doppio gioco?" ("However, in the next paragraph, I didn't understand well what is the double joke of Leo: can be considered double joke the act of occupying a city that the Arabs wanted to surrender him?" (I hope I translated well "cedergli"!) Martin8 stated: "In effetti è un po' ambigua la situazione. Io penso che gli arabi non abbiano mai pensato di donare a Leone Amorio (almeno leggendolo non mi è parso), quindi il doppio gioco consiste nel far credere che è dalla loro parte, ma in realtà approfitta dell'assenza di gran parte dell'esercito arabo per far man bassa dei territori non protetti." (I try to resume: he finds the sentence (and the situation) ambiguous and states that in his opinion "the Arabs didn't want to surrender Amorion to Leo, but the double joke consists in making the arabs to believe that he (Leo) is from their side, but actually he takes avantage of the absence of most of the Arab army to conquer the not protected territories"). Can you solve our doubts? Thank you and sorry if my english isn't perfect, I have still to improve my english skills a lot in order to reach a "native language" level (for this reason my edits on en.wiki are very few! I prefer to write in a language that I can write perfectly, italian)!--151.70.33.192 (talk) 15:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and thanks for your kind words! I am not quite sure I understand your question, but "Leo's double-dealing" was in shutting the Arabs out of Amorium. The Arabs had done him a service in getting the city, one of the strategically most important fortresses in Asia Minor, to declare for him especially as Leo had at this time still not proclaimed himself emperor. The Arabs could have easily taken Amorium, but preferred to have it acclaim Leo, in hopes of forcing the issue and bolstering Leo's image, per their strategy of dividing the Byzantines between Leo and Theodosius. Throughout the negotiations before Amorium (reported with some detail in the relevant primary sources), Leo is shown as acting duplicitously towards his supposed "allies", and his shutting the city against them and refusing to let them use it as a base was essentially a hostile act. I hope this helps, but feel free to contact me for any help or further questions you might have! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 16:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Fotakos

How would you evaluate Fotakos's reliability as a source for the 1821-1832 war?--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 13:00, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Wow, tough question, and I am really not qualified to give you a complete answer. His account is certainly among the most blunt and honest ones on the period, and personally I sympathize more with his viewpoint than e.g. the more "aristocratic" history of Trikoupis, but it shares all the limitations of a set of memoirs. Use him, but with caution and complemented by others. Constantine ✍ 13:46, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Constantine

I am asking pretty please if you could. Help with giving a clearer historical understanding to the East-West schism on the article talkpage. I hope I have not angered you in any way forgive me if I have. All the Best to you. LoveMonkey (talk) 17:53, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello! Why on earth should you have angered me? I'll help as best as I can, although religion and the Church is not really my forte. Constantine ✍ 10:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I've had a look, and I cannot exactly understand what is going on here. You have an extremely detailed article (IMO too detailed for the average reader), but I don't quite get why you are quarrelling. There's obviously a long history behind this, which I am not familiar with. If you could summarize for me the outstanding issues I could concentrate on them. Constantine ✍ 10:41, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Al-Muwaffaq

Hello! Your submission of Al-Muwaffaq at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Secretlondon (talk) 17:36, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

That's a difficult one. Al-Muwaffaq (bi Allah), means that he's been blessed/allowed to succeed by god. The "Successful" works as a rough translation, and to be honest I can't find a word that captures the exact nuance. Yazan (talk) 09:17, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I've made an emendation to the article, would you say it is correct? Constantine ✍

I think that's pretty accurate. One small correction might be needed though; Arabic sources, that I've seen, agree that he died on 22 Safar 278 Hijri. The website I use for the conversion to gregorian [6] returns 5 June, which is corroborated by several modern Arabic sources. see this for example. Nevertheless, this translation of Tabari, gives the date as 19 Safar (corroborated by the editor as 2 June). It contradicts the date given by most other sources, but supports the fact that 22 Safar is actually 5 June. I would go with 22 Safar/5 June. Yazan (talk) 11:18, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, if al-Tabari says he died on 19 Safar, then I would be inclined to lend credence to that, unless the modern Arabic sources you refer to cite some different author or have an explanation why al-Tabari might be off. Constantine ✍ 11:23, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Nope, the other sources don't cite any authors, and they are not RS; they're just more numerous (articles, wikis, etc.). Tabari it is then! Yazan (talk) 12:29, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Is this Greek?

This is an inscription to Zenobia on a column from the Great Colonnade at Palmyra. I want to know whether you recognize the script (I think the upper half) as Greek? And if you can understand anything at all? Many thanks. Yazan (talk) 12:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it is Greek, a standard dedicatory inscription: "The Assembly (Boule) and the People (Demos) to Julius Aurelius Zenobius who is also [here follows what is probably a transliterated name, "Zabdilandismalchoutounassoumou"], who was generalin the "epidemia" (could mean "journey" or "expedition") of the God Alexander and who served in the constant presence of Rutialius Crispinus who led the expedition [here's a part I can't make out] who served as agoranomos and who (in this post) spent not a little money and who fulfilled his public office well through this be a witness by the god Iaribolus and by Julius [erased] the most excellent prefect of the sacred praetorium and by the fatherland's honour to the lover of the fatherland in the year [cant' make it out]". The translation may be a bit off in the latter part, but that's the gist of it. Constantine ✍ 12:54, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Ha, I thought so, because it didn't look like the inscription showed in other books! Many thanks Constantine. It seems the file is wrongly used then; Julius Aurelius Zenobius, was Zenobia's father. Her Roman name is Julia Aurelia Zenobia. Is there a date there anywhere? Thank you anyway! Yazan (talk) 13:18, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

My pleasure :)! I've found the full inscription, with a translation, here. The date is ΔΝΦ in Greek, which in the Seleucid era (used very widely in the East) is 234 AD. The English translation is not 100% correct, for instance the "prefect of the sacred praetorium" would be a praetorian prefect rather than a praetor (who would be hard to find in Syria since this was an imperial province and under a proconsul IIRC). Constantine ✍ 17:15, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks Constantine. I find it fascinating that you can read a text that old, with ease. The script might not have changed much, but the language, I was under the impression, must've changed quite a bit. It would be very difficult for me to decipher the Arabic of early Islam, let alone Nabatean. Impressive! Yazan (talk) 14:14, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Heh, one of the things that modern Greeks take pride in is precisely this continuity :). Greek achieved a level of standardization with the Koine, and has changed relatively little since then. Almost the entire written literary tradition up to the 18th century was in the same language, with some authors archaizing more than others, although of course the actual vernacular dialect(s) diverged markedly. Modern Greek, however, is a mixture of Demotic Greek with liberal doses of Katharevousa, and is thus closer to the ancient language than it would have been otherwise. That doesn't apply to the Classical dialects, even the Attic one, however. There I'd probably need a lexicon. Constantine ✍ 14:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

(indent) That's quite interesting. I can see many parallels with Arabic as well, having only been standardized after Islam, and specifically through the Quran. Are you telling me though that it's gonna take us another century to resolve our diglossia? ;) (or triglossia, if you believe the Wiki article). Damn! Greece has been one of the most interesting places in Europe to me (even more so in its modern history, ironically). I read Theodorakis' memoirs of the Greek resistance during the junta when I was 16, and it left me with a very romantic image of that place (kind of like Orwell's Homage to Catalonia). So here's to our last common ancestor ;) Yazan (talk) 14:08, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I'll certainly toast to good old Seleucus! Yes, Greece has a lot of tragic moments in its modern history, and is almost always failed by those in charge... I think that in both mentality and historical experience of the past 200 years, the Spanish and the Irish are closest to us. As for Arabic, I suspect that it is far easier to harmonize the language of a few million people who mostly live under the auspices of a single state rather than the dialects of three hundred million stretching from the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean and dispersed among over twenty states ;). Even English, which is way more standardized, is unintelligible when used by Indians, for example. Diglossia is not a bad thing, IMO, it makes for a greater aptitude in learning other languages as well. After all, until relatively recently tri-, tetra-, penta-glossia etc. was more common than not in much of Europe and the Mediterranean world... Constantine ✍ 14:22, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

It is enriching, indeed. Although, I'd be damned if I understand half of what our friends in Morocco are saying. :)

On separate note though. Historically speaking, does one make a distinction between "Ancient Greek culture" and "Hellenistic" culture. I'm asking (not just purely pedantically) because I was under the impression, that Hellenism was used for the post-Alexander Greek world. In that case, the categorization system we have is faulty because the main category for Hellenistic settlements is Category:Ancient Greek sites by country, while it should be Category:Hellenistic sites by country. Or are the two exchangeable? Yazan (talk) 13:38, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, that is a good question. "Ancient Greece" has a narrow definition, i.e. Classical and Archaic Greece, as well as a broader one, i.e. the wider Greek world, which includes the Hellenistic states. Certainly a Hellenistic state/site/etc does not have to be "Greek", merely to have adopted the Hellenistic culture, even partly or superficially, so when speaking about such things, it would be wrong to use "Greek". There would be a point in distinguishing between a "Greek" site of the Hellenistic era (e.g. a Greek colony founded by a Hellenistic king) from a generic "Hellenized" site (e.g. Palmyra), but the distinction might be pretty fine. I suggest making a query at WP:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, it will get you a more in-depth response from several people who know more than I do on the field. Constantine ✍ 13:55, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Abu Taghlib

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Al-Muwaffaq

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Adrianople (1365)

Hi Kosta, could you give your opinion about this here. I have asked for the deletion of the article on wp fr: as far as there are no proper sources given about the subject (and the article's title has to be changed in every case). What do you think?--Phso2 (talk) 11:26, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, I had never examined this article in detail before, and chronology is damned difficult to establish. There's a dissertation, The Ottoman Conquest of Thrace - Aspects of Historical Geography, 2002, where the various dates are summarized:

“ There are many different opinions on the issue of the date of the conquest of Adrianople. G. Ostrogorsky suggests 1362. E. Zachariadou and I. Beldiceanu-Steinherr propose 1369. According to Zachariadou, the terminus post quem of the date in question is 1366, when a certain John Katakalon (oikonomos and deacon of the Adrianople metropolis) composed a poem-eulogy to emperor John V. This poem was commissioned by Polykarpos, the metropolitan of Adrianople (Orestias). The poem was written around Christmas 1366, when Polykarpos still held the metropolitan throne. I. Beldiceanu-Steinherr concludes that in the first time Adrianople was conquered by ‘independent’ begs around 1369, and later by the Ottomans in 1376/1377. The Byzantine Short Chronicles date the fall of Adrianople in 6877 indiction 7, which corresponds to September 1368 – August 1369. The Bulgarian historian A. Burmov argues that Adrianople was conquered in 1371. Burmov’s sources are certain Serbian chronicles, Chalcocondyles and Luccari. Luccari had used a Bulgarian source that has not survived. According to the author’s opinion, the battle between Serbians and Turks in Tzernomianon in 1371 should be considered in the context of the Serbian efforts to rescue Adrianople from the Turkish siege. H. İnalcık suggests the year 1361. S. Shaw agrees with İnalcık. In H. İnalcık’s opinion, the Ottoman traditions confirm the date 762/1361, which Oruç gives for the conquest of Adrianople. Furthermore, O. Halecki notes that, according to the Venetian sources, news of the conquest reached Venice on 14 March 1361. Unless this was a false report, shortly before this date, in the year 1361 ‘at the time the Maritsa was overflowing’, Adrianople surrendered to Murad. T. Gökbilgin writes that the conquest was accomplished under Murad I (1362-1389) by Lala Şahin Paşa, who defeated the tekvur at Sazlı-Dere, to the southeast of the city. The latter then fled secretly by boat from his palace on the banks of the Tunca and in Ramadan 763/July 1362 and the inhabitants of the town surrendered on condition of being allowed to live there freely. [...] Cantacuzenus and Demetrios Cydones, historians contemporary with the events, never mention the fall of Adrianople; had Adrianople fallen previous to 1371, this important event would most assuredly be echoed in their writings. ”

As far as I can tell, the "Turkish" historiographical view is summarized in Shaw's History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, 1976, p. 18 which simply states "Murat returned to Europe as soon as his position in Anatolia was established and restored the Ottoman position in 1361 with the capture of Edirne (Adrianople), the capital of Byzantine Thrace and the second important city remaining to the empire. Murat now made it his new capital", but then "The Ottoman capture of Edirne also stimulated Serbia, Bosnia, and Hungary to unite against the sultan. In 1364 they formed an allied army and marched toward the Maritsa in the hope of pushing the Turks out of Europe before it was too late. However, Murat ambushed their camp on the Maritsa near Edirne in a battle known in Turkish history as the "Rout of the Serbs" (Sirp Sindigi). Many soldiers and princes were drowned as they tried to swim across the river to safety. Louis the Great of Hungary was able to escape only with difficulty.". Colin Imber however follows Zachariadou in putting the date to 1369 (The Ottoman Empire, 1300-1650 - The Structure of Power, 2003, p. 11), the same as The Cambridge History of Turkey (2008). In general, most recent sources I have looked at (including A Military History of the Ottomans From Osman to Atatürk, 2009), seem to cite Zachariadou on the conquest. The present article seems to rely on the Turkish interpretation of events, and probably we are looking simply at a confusion with the Battle of Maritsa. So yes, it should be deleted. Constantine ✍ 11:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. It is always rewarding to read you.--Phso2 (talk) 12:53, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Leng T'che (talk) 21:23, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Zephyrium

Hi, I remember you have created some articles about the dioceses in Anatolia. It seems you have sources about ancient sees. Can you please be kind enough to help me to solve a problem. According to some sources (like New Advent) Zephyrium (modern Mersin, my home) was a titular see. But we know that the name of the city was changed to Hadrianopolis in the second century AD much before Christianity was legalised in the Roman Empire. So I can't see how the see was established in an empire which tries to supress Christianity. Since there were other places named Zephyrium, is it possible then that the see refers to another Zephyrium ? Thanks. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 19:54, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, the Roman Empire's attempts to suppress Christianity were rather sporadic. Serious persecution only happened under a few emperors, which means that most of the time, the Christians were left alone. We definitely know of sees established from the 1st century AD, so it really isn't an impossibility. I got out my copy of the Tabula Imperii Byzantini on Cilicia, and it says pretty much what we already have in the article on Mersin. I've made a few tweaks myself, but that is about it. As for other sites called "Zephyrium", the Realencyclopädie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft mentions a few, but all of them except for Mersin are either promontories or otherwise obscure settlements, mostly hapaxes. Constantine ✍ 09:25, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Award

It's a real honor to receive an award from you, Constantine. I'm a hard working editor but I'm really baffled by the sheer volume, consistency, and quality of your work over the years. And I've already came across some of your early articles (2007's) and I always expect you to make some revision after I put in my familiar "iw pt" (and that is what I do it instead of leaving it to the bots), usually adding sources or making it even better.

Sadly, the portuguese language literature about Bizantium is scarce (to say the least) and your work, translated by some of your fans here at ptwiki, is, most of the time, the only search result in our language available for some of the more obscure topics. So, I think that I should be awarding you instead! Thank you. José Luiz ^talk 22:42, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Amir al-umara

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Al-Harith ibn Surayj

Hello! Your submission of Al-Harith ibn Surayj at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Rosiestep (talk) 23:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Admin?

This is a rather random post, and I think I may have asked you this once before, but have you ever considered running for administrator? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 11:20, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Ed! Yes, you (and others) have asked this before, and although I appreciate the confidence you place in me, the answer is still the same: I am not interested. You saw how long it took me to place myself up for MILHIST coordinator, and this in a project I am active in and care about. If I put myself forward as an admin, I'd feel obliged to perform this role well, i.e. to partake in all the administrative drudgery of the admin boards. I already stretch my time to the limit balancing real life with trying to be an active editor, and frankly, the trouble is not worth the extra tools one gets. Plus I am not always as patient as required with trolls, nationalist POV-pushers, etc. I rather cherish my liberty to rant back at them, which as an admin I could not allow myself to do ;) Constantine ✍ 11:31, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I think that the only issue here are very high criteria you tend to set to yourself. I think it can not be an argument for not running for administrator. On the contrary. Nobody can oblige you to be more active than you can afford to yourself. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:37, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Possibly. However I don't see the need to apply for the mop if I am not going to use it. I have huge respect for the people who do this thankless job, but it is not my cup of tea. Constantine ✍ 13:01, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Coming in late, but, an admin who is a prolific content contributor to areas suffering from systematic bias, understands the difficulties faced by normal editors in these topics and is tough on nationalistic POV-pushers... sounds just like what the doctor ordered! Just saying.. ;) Yazan (talk) 14:19, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

You don't have to participate in the traditional administrator areas; I certainly don't! I normally use my tools to view deleted histories and the like. I just feel that you would use them well during the few times I'd hope you need them. But—unfortunately ;-)—the choice is yours. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 19:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Sturmvogel_66, AustralianRupert, and Nick-D look at ships, soldiers, and railways Op-ed: Nick-D on navigating the FA and A-Class review processes

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 02:11, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Al-Harith ibn Surayj

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Abu Firas

Is he by any chance on your to-do list? He's one of my favorite poets ever, and it would be great to have a decent article on him. Yazan (talk) 13:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

You'll be glad to learn that he is ;). I am planning (read: hoping to find the time) to bring all the articles on the Hamdanids to GA and beyond (the latter will probably depend on me getting a copy of Canard's Histoire de la dynastie des Hamdanides), and group them together in a nice WP:GT. Constantine ✍ 13:45, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Music to my ears! :) That's wonder Constantine. Thank you. Here's a little taste from our friend: "My people shall be reminded of me in their hour of need; for it is in the darkest of nights that a full moon is missed." Yazan (talk) 14:34, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Cplakidas. You have new messages at Zozo2kx's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tuzun

I started an article on Tuzun in my userspace, User:DCI2026/sandbox here. dci | TALK 02:08, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Sahib al-Shurta

On a separate note, I created a redirect for Sahib al-shurta rather than Shahib al-shurta and nom'd the latter for speedy deletion as a typo (it's a transliteration of Ṣad rather than šīn). Yazan (talk) 18:54, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Indeed you are right, thank you for the correction. Funny that I should make that mistake with a rather familiar word, I was probably thinking about something Persian then... Constantine ✍ 22:57, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Fall of Constantinople

Hello ! I'm a contributor on the French Wikipedia (Spartan 117) and I'm writing an article about the Fall of Constantinople. It is almost finished but i've a problem about the Kerkoporta and the reliability of the account of Doukas (the entry of Turks in Constantinople thanks to that gate). I know that there is the book of Philippides and Hanak which deal with that event. I don't know if you have this book but if you have it, could you give me an abstract of the authors' thesis ? Thank you ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.200.0.170 (talk) 21:32, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes I have it, I'll get it tomorrow and send you the extract! Cheers, 21:35, 4 December 2012 (UTC)Constantine ✍

Triple Crown

Thanks for all your work on ancient civilizations. All hail the emperor!--Ykraps (talk) 08:53, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Bugle interview

Hi Constantine. The Bugle runs a semi-regular interview series where we ask various editors to discuss a particular topic. Our next interview aims to bring together editors working in areas of military history that are perhaps under-represented in the English Wikipedia, for instance Byzantine history. Would you mind adding your views to the questions here? Our goal is to despatch this edition prior to Christmas, so if you can respond in the next two weeks, that'd be great. Thanks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:40, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll be happy to do it, a great idea! I am supposed to respond right after Cliftonian, right? Constantine ✍ 13:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, right after Cliftonian is fine. Glad you like the idea -- credit to Nick-D for thinking of it... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:15, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Attarouthi treasure?

Hello Constantine. Do you have any information on this so-called "Attarouthi Treasure from the Met? Apparently it was excavated (smuggled, more likely) from a Byzantine town in Syria called Attarouthi. For the life of me I can't figure out where that might be; and I can't seem to find sources on the subject that refer to its history before the Met acquired it. The town's name doesn't ring any bells either, and I'm wondering whether they might be using Syria liberally here (as a mention to the ancient area referred to as Syria, rather than the modern country). Any ideas? Do you remember reading about such town or treasure during your research? Many thanks. Yazan (talk) 14:54, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint, but the only thing I too know about it is that it is from a village in northern Syria. Apparently the name "Attarouthi" is the name of the site in Byzantine times, so don't go looking for it on a modern map. It may well be that the objects were found independently of the village site itself, and that these and the name is all that testify to its existence. Constantine ✍ 21:20, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm... I find it suspicious that a much advertised collection at the Met would have such an "abrupt" and ambiguous history. Thanks for looking anyway! :)

Rumelia and Rumelia Eyalet

Hi. Do you think there is a reason to have separate articles on Rumelia and Rumelia Eyalet?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:14, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I'd say yes: "Rumelia" is a historical geographic term broadly equivalent to "Ottoman Balkans" but with some very distinct nuances (in Greek, for instance, it refers to continental Greece excluding the Peloponnese), while the other is an administrative entity that is named after, but not coterminous with the former. Constantine ✍ 09:37, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:25, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK

Thanks, for the "medal". In its own minor manner it did contribute to the reduction of the depressive mood of a paper I was reading.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 15:01, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Depressing indeed, so I am doubly glad that it gave you a cheer-up. I have a journalist friend who has actually gone to the (former) lake. The images and description were like something out of a post-apocalyptic SF movie... Constantine ✍ 15:21, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Simon Harley on British battleships and Nick-D on the French Resistance Interview: Five editors discuss some less-represented areas of military history Op-ed: Ian Rose looks back on 2012

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:53, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

'Tis that season again...

	Happy Holidays!
	Hope you and your family are enjoying the holiday season, Constantine! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:04, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Ed! Likewise a happy Christmas season to you and your family! Constantine ✍ 09:09, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations

		The WikiProject Barnstar
		I am delighted to present you with this WikiProject Barnstar in recognition of your extensive contributions to the Military history WikiProject, as evidenced by your being nominated for the 2012 "Military historian of the year" award. We're grateful for your efforts, and look forward to seeing more of your excellent work in the coming year! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:39, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

THank you. Even to be considered among such outstanding editors is a great honour! Constantine ✍ 09:20, 30 December 2012 (UTC)