Talk:Euthymius the Athonite

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

This article seems useful, but contains a lot of peacock language, hence the cleanup tag. LostCause1979 05:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Article name[edit]

Gbooks hits:

  • "Euthymius the Athonite" (30)
  • "Euthymius of Athos" (12)

Bold move.--Zoupan 17:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Similar but not copied source[edit]

The article predates the entry in the 2015 Historical Dictionary of Georgia, despite what looks like excessively close paraphrasing. It's unclear if there's a backward copy, or if both have a common ancestor. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 06:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 August 2022[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 09:18, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Euthymius the AthoniteEuthymius the Iberian – His contemporaneous name per fresco from Mount Athos saying "Ivir" (Iberian). An emperor /// Ave 16:57, 19 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:37, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Emperor of Emperors: The requested move has been implemented. Florificapis (talk) 15:16, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Florificapis I have reverted the move. Please do not unilaterally move the page that is still under discussion. – robertsky (talk) 15:56, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Florificapis Thank you but we should wait for the voting results. You may vote kindly if you want. Thank you User:Robertsky for timely RV. Regards, An emperor /// Ave 18:33, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The current title is far more common in RS than the proposed. I have no strong opinion, but the nom's rationale is not really based on how we do things. Srnec (talk) 16:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.