Talk:4th of August Regime

message: An anon just added a pro-fascist website to the external links.  While the website itself is mostly just articles praising Metaxas, it contains approving links to much more extreme Neo-Nazi websites.  I clarified this in the link description, but that should not be taken as my voting that the link belongs here.  Jkelly 00:40, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See my reply in Talk:Ioannis Metaxas. - Stlemur 12:29, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Also see mine in Talk:Ioannis_Metaxas#Pro-fascist_website_added. Critias 10:42, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pro-fascist website added

message: It has been quite a while since i have looked up this article and lodged one of the first complaints against it (Metaxas Regime: Fascist or not Fascist), and I am very disappointed to see that little has changed. 
Although I was invited to make changes myself I see little use in spending time in doing so if my point was disregarded or misunderstood:
The simple fact that this is such a controversial topic means, in my way of thinking at least, that it should be renamed (into something like 'the Metaxas Regime') and it's actual contents thereby configured into showing the more undisputable HISTORICAL facts.
A SECTION of this new article should then be devoted to this particular topic which is in itself a DISPUTED topic. What is the sense in displaying only one point of view when there is also a second one, equally supported with evidence, and by established historians? Isn’t objectivity the main purpose of Wikipedia? If the main author wishes to simply state only his own opinions, I believe that he has found the wrong place to do so.
I must, and will, respect the main author's right to disagree with my (and many others', up to and including the renowned Richard Clogg's) point of view, but also demand the same from him.
And to be more specific: The latest version of the article is totally ridiculous. Take a look at the title and the first sentence right below it. A bit of a contradiction there i should think...
Also, about the last two sections of the Article. Who exactly were the 'observers' who expected Greece to Ally with Germany? Metaxas was APPOINTED, by the King, BECAUSE he was PRO-BRITISH.
And about Communist vs. Monarchist civil war here is a very simple rundown of the forces participating on eac side:
'Left wing':
KKE and it's military branch EAM/LAS (later DSE), as well as other independent or organised socialists and communists.
'Right Wing': 
Monarchists, MOST VENIZELISTS, most non-communist/socialist factions, including the remainder of the EDES and the other non communist guerrilla groups. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.205.239.131 (talk • contribs) .
:So I guess I'll formally propose a move of this page to 4th of August Regime. Discuss. - Stlemur 13:59, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Greek fascism' or 'Metaxas Regime'

message: Metaxas persecuted slavophone minorities in Greece there is no question. This article incorrectly states however that he persecuted "Macedonians" slavophones. The slavophones of Greece were either slavophone Greeks or Bulgarians. these are the only two ethnic groups ever mentioned in any authentic census or racial map of the area before the modern race of "ethnic macedonians" was masterminded by Tito. Therefore the use of the word "Macedonians" although acceptable in other works due to the right-to self-determination policy of wikipedia, is not acceptable in this case as it is referring historically to those persecuted. and obviously historically these people were NOT macedonians as the period is pre-WW2
only Bulgarians, Slavophone Greeks or the Slavophone population of Macedonia is acceptable
:Militant Macedonian nationalism was recognized as an issue in the Balkans considerably before WWII; see Stephane Groueff, Crown of Thorns for some details from a (somewhat biased) Bulgarian perspective. In particular, the IMRO, International Macedonian Revolutionary Organization is specified as having been "the terror of Yugoslav and Greek authorities" and that "the mainstream of the revolutionaries saw the solution as an autonomous Macedonia, a new and independent state omposed of the three territories presently ruled by Yugoslavia, Greece, and Bulgaria." So whether or not any of us or Metaxas believed there was a Macedonian nationality, they certainly did. - Stlemur 13:57, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Metaxas did not persecute 'Macedonians' because the supposed race of 'Macedonians' did not exist until after WW2

message: Why is the 'r' in regime capitalized?  Jkelly 05:08, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move 

message: The image :Image:Metaxas.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:52, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Metaxas.jpg

message: I stated in a recent edit that the regime was more likely merely authoritarian despite what Metaxas claimed due to the fact that religious tolerance, which dominates private lives, was in place. Such a strong privacy right makes it difficult for me to see how “totalitarianism” would be an appropriate label. IsMyNameTooLong (talk) 04:30, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Describing the civil status of the regime