I think Ioto is bogus article, and likewise I am thinking similarly about Heto. It seems like the English Wikipedia has it right, a small mention of heta in eta. What is your relationship to these articles? How were you alerted to it? -- Yekrats 19:52, 24. Jun 2008 (UTC)

Even Latin wiki: http://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abecedarium_Graecum (including admins) acknowledges them all. Thus removal of Heto is unneeded. I was checking interwikis for Heta while editing it and noticed your error. Please unlock template and other pages for me - I will do not place Yot, if I know that you do not want it here, and I will repair your mistakes. CBMIBM 19:55, 24. Jun 2008 (UTC)
Just because it appears in another Wikipedia and has not yet been deleted is not proof that it is a real topic. I remain unconvinced. In la:Formula:Abecedarium_Graecum it was reverted twice, and the administrator was yelled at by anonimous users. Wow, that sounds oddly familiar... -- Yekrats 20:39, 24. Jun 2008 (UTC)
The claim that we at the latin wikipedia in any way sanction his claims is hilarious. No one at Vicipaedia thinks they are part of the greek alphabet. As far as I can see, they are only part of the "greek unicode" character set. For the time being, in Vicipaedia we list them under the title: "Litterae rarius et in aliis linguis adhibitae" meaning "Rarer letters also used in other languages". In addition, there is a half dozen requests for citations to support what other claims are being made.--Rafaelgarcia 21:10, 24. Jun 2008 (UTC)

Via uzantonomo estos ŝanĝata redakti

23:46, 17 Mar. 2015 (UTC)

Renamed redakti

06:27, 19 Apr. 2015 (UTC)