"== Macedonians/Macedonian Slavs ==

I was under impression that the name of the article would change to a compromising variant: Macedonians (nation), Macedonians (nationality), Macedonians (people) or whatever since the resources shown clearly point that Macedonian Slavs is rather inappropriate. I'm glad the whole poll thing is over, but what is the overall conclusion: 

1. the naming committee will discuss on the matter of Macedonians/Macedonian Slavs name
2. Macedonian Slavs stays until another poll is organized or
3. a status quo for an indefinite period of time?

Since you seem to be the only neutral admin actively engaged in this debate, it seem to me that you are the right person to ask these questions....  02:49, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If a poll doesn't reach a decision, the poll is treated as moot and the status quo is continued. I agree that the name ""Macedonian Slavs"" is inappropriate (and many of the arguments made against using it were blatantly POV). The problem is that right now we don't have a mechanism for ensuring that the name is decided objectively. I'll have a chat with the other admins to see if anything can be done in the short term (bear in mind that the naming committee is just a proposal, it's not been endorsed yet).   11:43, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 I would like you to know that I appreciate your active involvement in the Macedonians/Macedonian Slavs issue, because if it is left to polls to decide such delicate matters, Wikipedia would soon degenerate. The English Wikipedia, and its mirror sites are the most important generators of the Macedonian Slavs term on the net - , which is much unfortunate, because it makes the term more ""common"" than it actually is. There was a brief period of some ""Macedonian Slavs"" references in BBC or CNN's news articles (the first half of 2001), but they have withdrawn the term very soon. The naming committee is a good idea to resolve matters of this type, since the naming of the article itself is a specific NPOV question - the different POV's can hardly be ""described"" in it. I don't want to leave the impression that I'm trying to put a pressure on you, but please resolve this dispute in a reasonable period of time (that is, don't forget about it -)). Thanks again for your contributions.  17:04, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Just remember that we need to figure out what is neutral, not what is objectively correct. A committee which ""votes"" on what is ""objectively correct"" will not get ""endorsed"". This is the kind of thing which probably cannot be decided by a committee. See Wikipedia:naming conflict.  (talk) 10:41, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

I didn't say we should decide what is correct, merely what the common usage is. What I'm arguing against is the use of arguments such as ""they don't have a right to use this name"", which is what's been happening so far. BTW, the link you provided doesn't work - could you point me to the right place?   10:45, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about the red link thing. I was using it as a ""forward reference"". That is, I made a comment referring to a policy page BEFORE writing that policy page. I also oppose the use (in Wikipedia articles, anyway) of arguments like X doesn't have the right to use the name Y. We can, of course, say that P rejects X's use of the name Y.  (talk) 01:40, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)

 The Naming Committee 

Hi, it's me again. About two weeks have passed since the end of the Macedonians/Macedonians Slavs poll. We are waiting for the Naming Committee to be established and to resolve this issue, am I right? Just to be sure...  9 July 2005 12:35 (UTC)

Pic of the Day
Hi Chris,

Just to let you know, that your picture Image:New scotland yard.jpg is due to make a reappearance as Pic of the Day on the 6th July. I've reused the caption from last time, but you can make any changes at Wikipedia:Picture of the day/July 6, 2005.   30 June 2005 08:59 (UTC)

Macedonians
Can you find some administrator to block the article temporarily until the spirits calm down? Or should I try to write to someone?  July 3, 2005 14:23 (UTC)

Don't worry about it - I'll warn him of the 3 revert rule and if he breaks it, I'll block him.   3 July 2005 14:25 (UTC)

Take a look at what's happening in the article. VMORO is starting an edit war by doubting every single of my edits, on sections which are irre