classmessagebox     This is an archive of past discussions Do not edit the contents of this page If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one please do so on the  current talk page NOEDITSECTION  Thorntons argument  I dont believe I removed sourced quotes I just added some more If I did remove some it was by mistake and I apologize but looking back I see Wohls quote is still there If you think Thorntons argument is expanded too much then it would be better to shorten it a little rather than delete it all If you think sourced quotes are removed then put them back in because it wasnt done on purpose If you dont think Bruce Thornton is good enough for this article then you can look up Love Sex and Marriage  a Guide to the Private Life of the Ancient Greeks by Nikos Vrissimtzis which has been translated into  languages There is more work but I think the way Thorntons argument is stated in the article best encompasses these views and best explains modern Greek views on the subject   If you are interested in the work of Nikos Vrissimtzis which has been praised by those who support his theories and strongly criticized by those who oppose them you can see the following BBC article on his book  httpnewsbbccoukhieuropestm      I was mistaken you didnt remove any sourced quotes My edit summary was wrong My apologies  However you are trying to restore an edit that was placed by a known sockpuppet I wont revert again but that is basically why I suspected your edit     Just in case anyone is wondering my previous comment does not mean that I agree with Cretanprides edits it simply meant that I regretted posting an erroneous edit summary and that I wasnt going to continue an edit war with a sockpuppet I certainly dont think the edit should stay      I dont understand why it is so difficult to add an alternate theory in the article Sources were given and everything was stated from a neutral point of view Noone gave any reason as to why it should not be included You all just yelled SOCKPUPPET and that was your defense Sources were given Thornton David Victor Hanson Mary Lefkowitz If they are not enough than you can look up Nikos Vrissimtzis There are scholars that argue the point that was expressed in the edit Why was it reverted What was wrong with it Why was it so bad it all had to go It was sourced and explained from a neutral point of view It improved the article    At this point Cretan your edits are being reverted not because of their content but because you are making them  You have exhausted the communitys patience and have been banned you no longer have the right to edit Wikipedia  The merit of your contributions or lack thereof no longer matters in this case sockpuppet is an adequate reason to revert contributions  That said I think that there are indeed a few grains of worthwhile content in Cretanprides screed  I see two points which probably merit inclusion  the support of Thorntons position by Hanson and Lefkowitz who are notable scholars and in Hansons case public figures and  the book by Vrissimtzis and the public response to it in Greece as evidenced by the BBC article and also these articles from the Guardian you may need to register to read them  I dont see any evidence that Vrissimtzis has posed a serious challenge to the scholarly consensus but if the book was as much of a hit in Greece as these articles indicate its worth mention  Finally we probably should acknowledge that both sides of the debate have attempted to use their own interpretations of history to support their positions in the modernday culture wars  One side happens to have much more solid scholarship to support it but it would be foolish to deny that LGBT advocates have used the DoverHalperin interpretation for political purposes as much as the Greek nationalists and antiLGBT activists have used the GeorgiadisVrissimtzis interpretation  Let me stress that I do not support Cretanprid