Hi Alexi, excellent work on the map! A couple of suggestions to improve it (if you feel like it).

• The spacing on some city names (e.g. Onchesmos, Kourestos, etc...) is uneven and makes them hard to read.
• You might want to use a different color for cities that are settlements of the indigenous Chaonians and Dassaretae (e.g. Himara), and different colors for colonies (Epidamnos, Apollonia).
• You might also consider using a larger font and marker for the larger and more important settlements, like Apollonia and Epidamnus, to differentiate them from the smaller ones.

Just some friendly suggestions. Keep up the good work. --Athenean (talk) 05:17, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alexi! I am afraid I am not really knowledgeable on the subject. What I can see is that, despite the monarch at the top, the federal structure of the League existed below, as the citations in Epirote League show. I also favour Epirus (ancient state) as a title, since it is usually perceived as a unitary state, but perhaps this duality of the monarch/hegemon and the League of Epirote communities ought to be given a bit more emphasis? Regards, and keep up the good work! Constantine ✍ 11:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Epirus (ancient state) 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! King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On August 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Epirus (ancient state), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wellcome back you POVish-bad boy. Τρελλάθηκες ε? Τι κάνεις? Έχω μιά υπόνοια ότι ήσουν κάπου στην Ήπειρο αλλά δεν μπορώ να το αποδείξω..--Factuarius (talk) 17:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On August 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Marinos Mitralexis, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

On September 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Zappas Olympics, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Hello Alexi! Can you please join the discussion here, there is a user who insists on a very peculiar definition of "international" for the Zappas Olympics, being intent on designating them as the first truly international Olympics. I admit I am getting very annoyed by him (είναι άσχετος από ελληνική ιστορία και προσπαθεί να μου την πει κι από πάνω). Could you, as the article's creator, take a look and provide a neutral opinion? Thanks, Constantine ✍ 23:14, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am aware of it. Unfortunately, this guy appears to be right, since Greek legislation does not allow FoP, i.e. to take and publish pictures of buildings, statues or other such publicly exhibited stuff that might be covered by the architect's or sculptor's etc copyright. There is a discussion going on at the moment in Commons, and several people from the Greek WP are trying to find out exactly what the law stipulates. However, until the situation has become cleared, this user (Iconoclast) has been asked repeatedly not to mass-nominate images for deletion. Being obviously only in Commons for trolling, he's been banned repeatedly (just now for a month). Until the definitive decision comes out (bear in mind, if it is negative, the images will be deleted), just ignore him and undo his requests for deletion. For more info see here. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 11:18, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 3, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Panagiotis Soutsos, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for your message. It's an interesting article about an interesting place. I've just made a change to the bear section; it suggested that there was more than one bear species in the park, but I think there is only Ursus arctos arctos. I'm not a bear expert, so perhaps you could check this? It would be nice to get a ref stating that the bear is this species before the article appears on the front page in a few hours' time. Regards, Ericoides (talk) 08:56, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 8, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pindus National Park, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Well, the presence of US-style ranks in the HAF site is more due to its own conscious and unconscious modelling on the USAF, and less on conventions of usage (to state this clearer, I don't think that a deliberate decision has been made by the HAF to use Army-equivalent ranks; its just that they are the US analogues and they are more handy nowadays). There are two systems of ranks for air forces: the German-French-Russian (and US) tradition which assigns them Army-style ranks, and the British Commonwealth one that gives special ranks. Greece follows the latter, as do a handful of other countries outside the Commonwealth. In such cases, it is customary to use British equivalent ranks to highlight that in the corresponding language, the officer in question is not called a "General" or "Colonel", but something else. I have seen this in several English-language history and defense publications, both for Greece and for these other countries. I certainly won't engage in an edit war over this ;), but I simply think that British ranks are a more "correct" form for rendering Greek Air Force ranks. Constantine ✍ 08:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I wasn't offended or anything. :) It was a perfectly good & valid objection... Constantine ✍ 11:45, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ioannis Giagkos, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Hey Alexikoua,

Would you be interested in helping me bring Cyprus up to GA-status. It's GA review is on hold now, and it would be a pity to miss this chance. --Athenean (talk) 03:04, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a few more comments to the review. I have also done some further copyedits to sharpen the prose. I don't have any more time to spare, but I wish you luck with the article. Brianboulton (talk) 18:51, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please , Stop the bandalisem in Albanian pages ..!! --Artemisa ne adenice (talk) 16:29, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly of what I added is vandalism?Alexikoua (talk) 16:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pyrotec has made Vikos-Aoos National Park a GA. Congratulations!

But above all, thank you for your good work. While obviously not quite as beautiful as the the park itself, the article is really beautiful. I am looking forward to a nice hour or two reading all the details and dreaming of a day in the Vikos gorge. Hans Adler 18:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi my second me. It seems that either you are my sock[1] or I am according to Guildenrich[2]. Although I have repeatedly ask him to go for a check or to stop accusing[3][4], he insisting spreading the rumour around (per Goebels: "accusing accusing something is always remain"). Recently he did it again with Ironholds[5]. To me actions must taken. Will you do it or I will? --Factuarius (talk) 09:20, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Suppose" Fut? --Factuarius (talk) 09:40, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am very annoyed learning that he accuse me of being your sock. Until today I was the master. I am going to post a protest for this unfair sadden change, directly to his talk page. Can you plz do it for me? --Factuarius (talk) 19:55, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

depressing, but take an advice: Try for a change to be a little wiser, Ι wasn't arrogant when a few hours before you were my tail and that's an evidence about who could be the real 'master'. Life is full of surprises Alexikoua and tomorrow is a new day, he may change again his mind, and then you might be able to answer by yourself to the question.. --Factuarius (talk) 22:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the book says that many Albanians trace their roots, not that Albanians are actually descendants of Achilles, the gay lover of Patroclus. Please, let's discuss this at the talk-page. Guildenrich (talk) 23:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sarandioti, banned (21:50, 28 September 2009) [6] after voting (21:11, 17 July 2009). Vote stays. Guildenrich (talk) 14:06, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The map found on the Epirus (region) is clearly original research. This one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EpirusEduMap.jpg being created as synthesis of several cherry picked sources is clearly against policies. Just as well, one can cherry pick eight other academic sources from another point of view and then show it as fact. Azalea pomp (talk) 22:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I posted a response on the Epirus region page. Azalea pomp (talk) 00:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I posted some more responses on the Epirus region talk page. Azalea pomp (talk) 19:57, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some more comments again on the Epirus page. My main purpose for the Epirus page it so assure that we are accurately using the sources for the maps. I want them to be correct and thank you for your work on fixing the Mycenaean dot map. What is interesting is that the Greeks, Macedonians, Albanians, Illyrians, Dacians, Thracians, Phrygians, Paeonians, Bryges are all Indo-European anyway, but still I think that since we are dealing with very specific groups and many of which are little known, we just can't blanket terms like Thracian on tribes just because we may think they are related. We have to use the academic sources and what the scholars have. Whatever personal views or theories we have, we should not include those. Azalea pomp (talk) 21:51, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks the new map of Mycenaean sites looks nice. Azalea pomp (talk) 03:59, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See [here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Xenos2008]--Anothroskon (talk) 17:00, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On December 5, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Himariote Greek dialect, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

...although there was no need for conratulations I thank you for the thumbs up and wish a Merry Merry Christmas to you and your loved ones. Να 'χεις καλές γιορτές φίλε μου, με υγεία, αγάπη ευτυχία και προσωπική πλησμονή.--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 21:31, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alexikoua, what do you mean by 'a number given by the same minority'? This reference was published in 2009 and thus probably the most recent publication of any estimated figures of the Turkish minority.Thetruthonly (talk) 16:13, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I see what you mean. If you want we can change the wording e.g. write something alone the lines of 'according to the Turkish minority...' What do you think?Thetruthonly (talk) 16:33, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that.Thetruthonly (talk) 16:36, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Alexikoua, I was just wondering if you could help me. According to sources, the last Greek census which gave data on religious affiliation and mother tongue was in 1951. So would it be possible if you could help me find data from the 1951 census? Thetruthonly (talk) 11:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have not violated the three-revert rule so spare your threats. You can count to 3 I can count as well. --Gligan (talk) 23:26, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On February 8, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Elaia–Kalamas, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thank you, Alexikoua! That was quite unexpected! I will try to continue my efforts! All best, --Tadija (talk) 09:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I invite you to join WikiProject NPOV, a WikiProject whose aim is to increase the neutral point of view of articles related to controversial issues and topics. It is chiefly designed to help users collaborate on articles, but also to resolve disputes, and to coordinate work on vandalism clean-up. All the best, --Cinéma C 22:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When are you going to stop already reverting everything I do. The map is wrong and the name is not applicable for the whole state and is not universally established. --Gligan (talk) 13:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If I put "cn", there can always be found a citation for that (that is as if to write that Alexander of Macedon was an ethnic Macedonian and to tell you to put a citation needed note instead of reverting) which does not mean that the term is widely accepted. In fact, that is a 19th century invention in the style of what the Macedonians are doing now. Kaloyan was indeed sometimes called Emperor of Bulgarians and Vlachs and what? Was Bulgaria under Simeon Bulgaro-Roman Empire? That thing is completely inapplicable for the whole existence of the country and not universally accepted therefore it does not belong to the lead. It is already mentioned in a note. As for the map, that you brought back after you reverted me - 1) it is wrong 2)there are already plenty of maps in the article. You should not blindly revert my edits.

As for Kostja and Monshuai, I don't know what is their aim but after all the lead will be changed to what it is agreed in the discussion. I already advised Monshuai to put his ideas as a suggestion for the lead or to add them in one of the current suggestions. --Gligan (talk) 23:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all Alexikoua, but I believe it's time with Sulmues's participation to clear the article's issues as to remove these flags. I don't know if you and he, have the time but I believe, it's necessary. As you might seen, I asked him to open a talk there about that, as to facilitate a discussion which would help to close the issues. If he'll do it be our quest. --Factuarius (talk) 07:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was here to drop a line to Alexikoua and I saw my name. What's exactly the issue, Factuarius? sulmues (talk) --Sulmues 14:36, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, and where is the line? Are you sure that you are not following me all the way around? Anyway, this is not the right place to discuss the issue (in fact the issues) the Cham Albanians has connecting to the flag you want to remove. As I already told, you must open a discussion in that article's talk page as to discuss and correct any possible issue as to remove the flag you want. That's what is all about here. And don't forget to drop the line to Alexikoua. AND STOP FOLLOW ME EVERYWHERE !! thanks, --Factuarius (talk) 03:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The line was already dropped below, on the Protocol of Corfu part 1 minute after I wrote to you, and I ain't following you, I really saw that you mentioned me and I had no clue what was it all about. Cham Albanians? Will do it at some time. sulmues (talk) --Sulmues 22:38, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alexikoua I put a reference for your review there. Could you please take a look at it? sulmues (talk) --Sulmues 14:36, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me out improving the language of these small articles [7] [8].Megistias (talk) 15:33, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here too, when you have the time [9] , [10]Megistias (talk) 16:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a new one Peresadyes Megistias (talk) 20:54, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to move Vasileios of Dryinoupolis as a notable figure from Libohova to Labova e Kryqit, by openinng a new article on Labova e Kryqit. I will help with that and we'll put the image of the 12th century church. Libohova is 100% muslim village, and even though they are close they are separate. Labova e Kryqit is a 100% Christian village. sulmues --Sulmues 15:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually they are further apart than what Boboshtica and Korca are between them, so if you removed Victor Eftimiu from Korca, then you should remove Vasil Papakristo from Libohova. sulmues --Sulmues 15:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know how to categorize redirects? Like those of Berat, - Antipatreia & Antipatrea. Megistias (talk) 18:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I mentioned you here. --sulmues (talk) 15:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alexikoua I have replied to your comments in [11], that is my comment [12].--ObserverFromAbove (talk) 18:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ObserverFromAbove, Sarandioti?--Ptolion (talk) 21:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To whom are you referring to Ptolion? Alexikoua if you think I am a sockpuppet as you stated, report me to the administrators and they will tell you that I only edit from 2 IPs: a corporate IP located at my work and my home IP and do not edit my userpage. --ObserverFromAbove (talk) 23:46, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, with all due respect, i think you over-reacted here, if the ip was a banned user every edit is eligible to reversion of course. But it wasn't vandalism and to be frank i think it's a better choice. I don't believe "Turko-Albanian" has a very established usage in this or in any other historical context, in English sources that is. It's descriptive meaning is more perplexed also, while we might know that it refers mostly to Albanian Muslims faithful to the Gate, a reader could also understand "a mixed group of Albanians and Turks", "a group of mixed Turkish-Albanian origin" or at least "partly Turkified Albanians", all could be true, depending on occasion and perspective, but do our sources in this issue and the interpretation we give to them based on NPOV allow any of these assertions ? Just my two cents.--Δρακόλακκος (talk) 19:14, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i see we have a different starting point here, i always thought that "Turko-albanians" refers to Albanian Muslims primarily, maybe i'm mislead from the topic i have mostly encountered it, Epirus, where indeed in all the texts i've read the terms coincide. The whole issue for me is not so important, that's why i opted for a discussion here and not in the article's talk page. Just some notes on the sources you picked, the first one confirms the definition i know, it mentions that Ljapidhes (which were a group of Albanian Muslims) where known in the local narrative as "Turko-Albanians". The second source mentions "Turkalbanians" as a literary translation of the Greek "Tourkalvanoi", this one includes Turks as well to its meaning but it still places its use inside a Greek perspective, and we don't see any further use of the term that would imply an endorsement. That said, i've taken a quick look at the search results you linked to, although some quite old publications are included, it seems at least one recent source treats "Turko-Albanian" (or "Turco-Albanian") as referring to Muslims in general, although the whole context is not available in googlebooks to be 100% sure. I guess if we are not sure about the ethnicity of Ottoman troops in this issue "Turko-Albanians" covers all possibilities, although "Turk-Albanians" seems more proper English.--Δρακόλακκος (talk) 04:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please respond shere? --sulmues (talk) 23:44, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On March 4, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Zakynthos Marine Park, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Watch yourself here. Close to another edit war block. Please discuss with the relevant parties beforehand. Thanks.  f o x  (formerly garden) 21:40, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]