")
Oh I did read your comment. But I also read what you wrote before that and it is obvious you're trying to cover up your arrogant attitude despite your obvious ignorance of basic facts: ""Until you can produce a reliable linguistic source that has conducted more recent linguistic surveys in northern Greece, then Ethnologue is the most recent, most reliable source."" and then ""I'm not sure what the ""howler"" is at the link to Macedonian that you provided."" and then ""If you have an exact reference to it then use it to edit the number in the article (and include the reference) since it looks like a more recent survey. I'm not wedded to Ethnologue or its number, but it just required a reliable source with a new number to supplant the only other reliable source available."" Even after FPS (for Pete's sake not some pesky Greek nationalist with a POV agenda) explains more than once that there was no census in 1986 and that Ethnologue's number is bogus you insist on talking about ""more recent"" and ""only other reliable"". So if Britanica (a far more serious outfit than Ethnologue) claimed that Greece had a population of 20 million according to the 1986 census you'd call that reliable even though it is an obvious error (both the magnitude of the number as well as the year of the census)? Learn to admit your prejudice causes you to make mistakes or stop bitching about the ""level of the attack"" any knowledgeable observer would ""initiate"". Better still stick to things you actually are knowledgeable about. As for my references if you actually read them you'd see that Eurominority counts villages with full or partial use of the language and V-PRC gives percentages (being sample-based). Neither agree with Ethnologue and V-PRC comes above the SD estimate.   22:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC"