Talk:Macedonia (terminology)/Archive 3

message: There was a querry regarding the official involvement or otherwise of Skopje in promoting material that shows the region of Macedonia as the official borders of the state - thereby claiming lands from Albania, Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia. I would like to add to the previous list:
* The official history manual for schools: History book, Grade 8 History, Skopje 1992.
The table of contents is quite indicative http://uranus.ee.auth.gr/new/eng/macedonia.old/kofos/fig15.html]: For the period from 1913 to 1990, the chapters are divided into subchapters on 'The Aegean part of Macedonia' and 'The Pirin part of Macedonia'. The text and context promotes the notion that the ROM consists of the region of Macedonia, a region that forms geographically and ethnically a single entity, but has been politically divided since 1913, with only 'Vardar Macedonia' being liberated.
For the partisan activities in WWII, there is a map of 'The free zone in Macedonia in August 1943' . The free areas are shaded and they include those parts of Greek Macedonia that were temporarily controlled by Yugoslav Macedonian partisans; but the map excludes the free areas of Greek Macedonia liberated and controlled by the Greek partisans of ELAS. In other words, the areas of Greek Macedonia held by Greek partisans are considered as much under occupation as those controlled by the Axis. As for Greek history (excluding Greek Macedonia), from antiquity to the modern age, it is treated quite fairly. There are more examples in those school books  Politis 13:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Last time I checked, a few years ago, Skopje issued standard school manuals for all the country. If this is still the case, perhaps a friend from Skopje can fill us on that. But the point remains that, at least until the 1990s, the history books held that line; and we have the pictures of the relevant pages. Personally, I very much doubt if changes were made; school manuals are quite reluctant to re-edit themselves. Now, how is it relevant? Good question. Perhaps somewhere in the context of irredentist usage of history and, in our case, of terminology? The floor is yours... Politis 16:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: This is yet another example of how gross the propaganda in that country is... All of "their" history is either fabricated or the twisted history of Bulgaria and Greece. I really hope our government is finally going to do something about it now (see Ivaylo Kalfin), like vetoing their EU membership (around 2015) if they don't put an end to this. They've been usurping Bulgarian history for decades now and it's a shame our government hasn't done much to stop them. I mean, when it's the history of the Bulgarian (now Slavic Macedonian) population of Macedonia, it's also theirs, it's a part of their Bulgarian heritage, but they just steal it and traduce us and all things Bulgarian in their history books (and not only there). Todor→Bozhinov 16:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes but that means nations should stop ranking and comparing themselves in any way, and that's not going to happen.   /FunkyFly.talk_  17:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not with that attitude it isn't! :) - FrancisTyers · 21:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Trust the Greeks to come up with all the best quotes ;-) Will try and find out what Greek school manuals say. Politis 17:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ROM/FYROM official propaganda

message: John Comstock, History of the Greek Revolution complied from official documents of the Greek Government... and other authentic sources; New York, 1829.
p.2. [Title of chapter] 'Geographical Situation and Population of Greece'.
There is some difficulty in prescribing the exact boundaries of the country properly called Greece. Formerly it included Macedonia, Peloponnesus, the Ionian Islands, Crete, and a part of what is now called Albania. [...]
The present divisions of Greece, adopted by the provisional government, are the following: Eastern Hellas, Western Hellas, Morea, Epirus, Thessaly, Macedonia, Crete, and the Islands.
p.7. M. Beaujour concludes the total population of Greece to be 1,920,000 including Macedonia. Politis 14:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, and Ypsilanti planned a government which would include the entire Balkan peninsula; so what? Nor does anything here show that Macedonia was never "presented" as part of the Ottoman Empire.  Septentrionalis 21:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Full text for 1829 quote

message: Ooh, I don't like this. I'm strongly opposed to calling a mostly Bulgarian-identifying population "ethnic Macedonian", if that is meant by "Macedonians". The Slavic population may have certainly spoken Turkish and Greek at the market, but that's not important. I particularly dislike the way that "same dialect" is first described as Serbian, than "Macedonian" (anachronistic) and in the end "West-Bulgarian". POV. Todor→Bozhinov 12:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On the contrary, it's the basis of one of the ethnographic maps, I believe by a Bulgarian. (And it cuts both ways; the Pomaks spoke Bulgarian at the market.) Septentrionalis 14:25, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Where is that in the article? - FrancisTyers · 13:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I see now. Well, it is cited, from Wilkinson, so unless you want to remove Wilkinson as "hopelessly POV" (which I think would be a bad idea) we should probably live with it. He doesn't specify ethnic Macedonian or regional Macedonian — presume it is the one that fits your POV and sleep soundly. - FrancisTyers · 13:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed to "an inhabitant of Macedonia", alrhough clumsier. Wilkinson does mention that the dialects of the area around Skopje were differently named by different ethnographers; if the order of the labels is somehow offensive, feel free to change them. Septentrionalis 13:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, is it really important to the article? And what period does Wilkinson refer to? Currently that part is very ambiguous, not quite important and possibly inaccurate. After all, it's the geography section and discussing language is a bit of a divergence from the topic. I'd suggest removing it. Todor→Bozhinov 14:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It refers to the period between 1878 and 1912 (and to some extent after 1912); I thought that was clear. I think it important to show that the major difference between the ethnographers is in the internal divisions of Macedonia rather than the borders; and that their differences are in part justifiable. If you would rather have Wilkinson's comments on the motives, reasoning, and integrity of ethnographers of all nationalities, I can supply those instead. (That there are other applicable standards than self-identification is important.) Septentrionalis 14:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Macedonians"? 

message: If any editor wants to write 
*The Greek claim to Macedonia
*The Bulgarian claim to Macedonia
...or
*The Fooian claim to Macedonia,
please go ahead and do that. Please make sure every clause is sourced and verifiable (as somebody's assertion); I will help defend such articles against hostile edits. Septentrionalis 20:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't it be better (lol, edit: worse) to have Claims to Macedonia? - FrancisTyers · 21:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure they can each fill up an article ;-}. I am serious in suggesting that such articles would be encyclopedic, and that (if every claim is sourced as "X claims this and this, and Y argues as follows that therefore Macedonia is rightfully Fooian") they would be NPOV - describe arguments, don't advocate them. Septentrionalis 15:50, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I strongly disagree. The only contemporary X claims to Macedonia that have been sourced are the ones already illustrated in the article. I doubt you will have any content for contemporary Greek or Bulgarian claims to Macedonia to match these and make them deserve the equal status of an article title. This is just one more biased whitewashing attempt of undue weight. :NikoSilver: 11:49, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Greeks have no claim to the periphery called Macedonia? The Bulgarians have no claim to the area around Gotse Delchev? These are novel positions indeed. If you mean that these nations have no claims beyond their present borders, I'm not sure Todor would agree with you. Septentrionalis 15:33, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Thank you for your comments below. Please explain, because I don't understand how we can compare a Bulgarian claim over Bulgarian soil (Gotse Delchev (town)) and a Greek claim over Greek soil (Macedonia (Greece)) to a (pardon my Greekness:) Slavomacedonian claim to Greek and Bulgarian soil (all of Macedonia (region)). I don't consider that London being claimed by the Brits deserves a British claims of London article either. :NikoSilver: 20:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A modest proposal

message: I will, this once, consider the day's edits individually, with edit summary.
:Pmanderson, I am responding below each, and this once, I am requesting politely you become more civil, assume good faith, and quit underestimating other people's work. :NikoSilver: 22:28, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And I will too. Please don't make me feel your comments are ironic again. :NikoSilver: 22:28, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 10 August

message: The Original Barnstar
		I award this humble barnstar to all those who worked tirelessly to make this one the best article related to Macedonia, arguably the most complex and tense topic in the universe :) Todor→Bozhinov 18:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Common! There is more complex that that. :-) CG 10:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Nuclear physics? Back off, here comes Macedonia! :P Todor→Bozhinov 12:47, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Congratulations! 

message: keep current name.
Yada, yada, yada:
*Only registered users are eligible to vote.
*Users must have at least 50 edits until August 15th 2006.
*Multiple votes are allowed.
*Poll ends Tuesday September 12th 2006 midnight UTC.
*Clear consensus (60%) is required.
**In case none of the options reaches 60%, then the two prevailing options in votes will be put to an additional poll, which will last one more week.
**In case none of the options reaches 60% after the second poll, then the first option in number of votes will be used as the article title, as a stop gap measure, but the title issue will be still debatable after a sensible period of time, which will be discussed by the participating users.
*You may add additional proposals, if your preference is not listed below, by initiating a new heading.
*Please refrain from commenting along with your vote, to facilitate poll process. Instead, post your comments right below in the '#Comments:' section for further discussion. Also, if you respond to any comment, kindly copy it below, and do it there.
*Please indicate your preferred article title by signing with four tildes (~) below:
----
====Macedonia (terminology)====
Note: No change in title.
#FrancisTyers · 10:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. It's closed. Why did you need an admin to do that, again? Jkelly 21:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Poll

message: Note: No change in title.
#FrancisTyers · 10:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Macedonia (terminology)]]

message: Note: Other prepositions instead of 'of' should be included in this heading.
#FrancisTyers · 10:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Terminology of Macedonia]]

message: # As with meaning, below, but I prefer meaning. Septentrionalis 21:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Definition of Macedonia]]

message: # Might actually occur in running text. Septentrionalis 21:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Meaning of Macedonia]]

message: *After modelling this on British Isles (terminology), I think this is the most appropriate name, with (terminology) in parentheses. - FrancisTyers · 10:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. It's closed. Why did you need an admin to do that, again? Jkelly 21:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments:

message: Is it just my Firefox or is there actually some problem with the in-line refs? E.g., the link to the Pirin Macedonia endnote in the text says N-[4], but the endnote itself and the link from the  template insist on N-[2]. Also, the endnote doesn't have a b like it's supposed to, but an arrow ↑ instead, so it doesn't seem to recognize the Pirin Macedonia link in the text for some reason (though the Pirin Macedonia link in the text does take me to the note, but when I click the arrow it goes to the template link).
On the other hand, the McCarthy, J. ref (#15) doesn't seem to recognize the one from  and the arrow it has instead gets me back only to the link in the text.
The N-[3] a b and N-[5] a b links are OK, however. Todor→Bozhinov 11:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Todor, the templates are known for being dumb with the refs. As for the rest, there have been some additions/modifications. I didn't find any more mistakes. Kindly re-examine yourself. •NikoSilver• 12:04, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Dunno about the rest, but the issues with Pirin Macedonia and McCarthy, J. still stand :( Todor→Bozhinov 12:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, fixed everything but McCarthy, J in template. Please check once more. It was quite tedious...•NikoSilver• 13:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Pirin Macedonia is fine now, thanks! :) Todor→Bozhinov 14:42, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In-line refs 

message: When will this article appear on the front page of the wiki? Has it appeared already?   /FunkyFly.talk_  16:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It hasn't :) It will sooner or later appear on the Main Page, but we can also request it on Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests. Main Page FAs are being arranged about 10 days ahead of appearing and the guy who generally looks after that section of Wikipedia is User:Raul654. Todor→Bozhinov 18:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I took the liberty of posting it there (Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests#Macedonia (terminology)) a week ago... I've also included some date recommendations...•NikoSilver• 19:25, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Gosh, I didn't even bother looking for it on the page :( My bad. Thanks for posting it there, I really liked the date recommendations. Can't wait to see that one hit the Main Page! Todor→Bozhinov 21:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Re my last addition please refer to previous discussions here and here, as well as FrancisTyers' talk here. •NikoSilver• 13:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Schoolbooks - govt. publications 

message: This is a government agency wrting - not Joe Average; hence, as with the school text, the news item reflects a persistent irredentist strand in Skopje's government. Politis 15:24, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No Politis, it is not 'persistent irredentist strand'. The guy who wrote that probably makes the perfectly logical equation Macedonia=Macedonia. He's also been taught about that at school... •NikoSilver• 23:45, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: MIA: sucky agency or occasionally prone to irredentism?

message: Just added, as it was the only section without an intro par. Feel free to modify, enhance, or revert. •NikoSilver• 13:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro par in Politics section 

message: Would this ("The Macedonians were tall, large, robust people similar in appearance to the Dorians...") or this (" The Makedones (or Macedonians) were regarded as tall people, and they are likely to have received their name on account of their height...") suffice, or do we need a contemporary source in this instance? I really can't stand that [citation needed] needed tag :) Todor→Bozhinov 19:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The first is to the Pan-Macedonian Organization of Ontario; the second doesn't work. If you want to say "the Pan-Macedonian Organization of Ontario asserts...", fine. But I'd rather have a scholarly source in English, and would prefer one from the later twentieth century; unless this is a nineteenth-century mare's-nest, there should be several. (I have no opinion on whether it is or not - until the source is shown.)Septentrionalis 21:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tall Macedonians ref