Talk:Macedonia (region)/Archive 1

message: I noticed an edit war going on here. Can we discuss having this article locked like Macedonian Slavs?
Why do Greek people object to the historic Slav name Solun? Vladko
===History of Macedonia===
::2.4 Independence of the Republic of Macedonia
::2.5 Controversy: Republic of Macedonia and Greece
::2.6 Controversy: Republic of Macedonia and Bulgaria
::2.7 Macedonia and the Yugoslav Wars
This history, is history of FYROM!
Not history of article "Macedonia"
::Vergina 20:28, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Your calling me names will not deter me from continuing to oppose your VMRO propaganda until it is completely removed from this Macedonia article. You may be a paid agent of the VMRO or of FYROM or I don't care who, but I don't need compensation other than the truth. I have no agenda to occupy or expand (like you and your buddies trying to invade Greece all the way to Thessaloniki). I just will not allow you to spread your filth here. Philaleth 12:09, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article lock 

message: ::2.4 Independence of the Republic of Macedonia
::2.5 Controversy: Republic of Macedonia and Greece
::2.6 Controversy: Republic of Macedonia and Bulgaria
::2.7 Macedonia and the Yugoslav Wars
This history, is history of FYROM!
Not history of article "Macedonia"
::Vergina 20:28, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: History of Macedonia

message: Get a psychatrist, Philareth, you are in a desperate need of one. Did you actually have foam on your mouth when you wrote that crap above? Because you behave as if you have rabies. And learn my name, it is not VMRO but VMORO. I'll go to the marshes when you pack your bags and go to Asia Minor. I am sure the Turks will organize you a gracious welcome for you, haha... VMORO
Yeah, and something else - if that (meaning the Sad lot piece of prose) is a manifestation of Greek intellect, then Greece is in deep shit. Enjoy. VMORO
: Your calling me names will not deter me from continuing to oppose your VMRO propaganda until it is completely removed from this Macedonia article. You may be a paid agent of the VMRO or of FYROM or I don't care who, but I don't need compensation other than the truth. I have no agenda to occupy or expand (like you and your buddies trying to invade Greece all the way to Thessaloniki). I just will not allow you to spread your filth here. Philaleth 12:09, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Get a psychiatrist, Philareth

message: Vergina has contributed the following text but putting it at the end of the article is clearly inappropriate, so I've moved it here for discussion. The content appears to have been lifted from http://www.helleniccomserve.com/olympicmacedonians.htm (so it may also be a copyvio); perhaps it would be more appropriate to link out to that web page. I feel that it may be an unnecessary level of detail to go into in what is supposed to be an overview article. -- ChrisO 16:30, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Macedonians at the Olympics

message: Macedonia=Macedonia in Greece+ Bitola (FYROM)
FYROMs citys ,Ohrid,Prilep,Strumica,Kicevo,
Tito Veles,Stip,Gostivar,Tetovo,Skopje,Kumanovo are not Macedonia!
The borders of Macedonia are to see clear.
See Map:http://www.freeeliterature.com/AtripThroughTime/Files%20and%20Maps/athenian_empire_450.jpg
Vergina 16:17, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Macedonia around 450 before Christ

message: Hi. I've done some formatting of the history section. Mostly adding sections to make it easier to follow chronologically, and also added some info (included sources as comments in the text). I'm not completely sure if any of it is disputed, if it is, please do add opposing beliefs in order to keep it NPOV, but please don't remove anything preferably as I have included sources. At some point I suspect the article may start to get >32Kb, so when that happens, I'll split the history section off into a "history of Macedonia" article. Regards, --Rebroad 23:44, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: yes...don't forget to leave a history summary behind. This article is lacking a geography section, for anyone interested--Jiang 01:02, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article starting to get bigger, especially the history section 

message: The article in its current state includes a distorting POV, overemphasizing in the linguistic differences between the Macedonians and some of the other Greeks. The ancient Macedonians spoke Doric Greek, the same dialect the Spartans used to speak. That was somewhat different from the Attic Greek language of Athens, but still Greek and still intelligible by the rest of the Greeks. Furthermore, in the statement:
:"The Hellenistic character of Macedon grew over the next century until, under the rule of Philip II of Macedon, Macedon extended its power in the 4th century BC over the rest of northern Greece."
the word Hellenistic is an anachronism, misplaced in time and space. Etz Haim 08:57, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  The language of Macedon 

message: Please could someone provide an explanation why some content was removed? Thanks, --Rebroad 11:29, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuff deleted with no reason given? 

message: When I first saw all the changes I was a little taken aback as it looked like a lot of stuff had been reverted, but after reading through a lot of it, most of my contributions seem to still be there but rephrased in places, so thanks to VMORO for your efforts there. I did kinda prefer the maps I'd uploaded showing the before and after 1913 maps, but certainly the now current map has some extra info. My only gripe would be the heading changes - I think it helps to have the dates in the titles, making it easier for people to see where to insert any additional information. A minor point though, I'm sure. --Rebroad 12:15, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  VMORO changes 

message: This is VMORO's edit summary as he reverts an anonymous edit. See here  how much of a vandal anon was. Etz Haim 14:33, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "rvt Greek vandalist act" 

message: From Macedonia to Region of Macedonia.
:Macedonia is a geographical and historical region - intro says so 
I did this. If anyone objects, please say so. There is no move log, so this is the only way I can find you! -- Uncle Ed (talk) 22:46, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
:(copied from Talk:Macedonian Slavs) I'm not sure it was an improvement, to be honest - it makes it sound like a disambiguated page when it's not. Consider "region of Epirus", "region of Thrace", "region of New England" etc. I don't think adding "region of" really adds anything. It's a region by definition; calling it "region of" seems rather like a tautology. -- ChrisO 22:55, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Title changed and locked

message: This is not CORRECT! Achaea ?
See Map of the Roman Empire
Vergina 07:33, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Roman Imperial Provinces, 120 AD

message: For anyone who wants to learn more about the human rights in greece, here is google's results on the issue: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2Bgreece&btnG=Search
For anyone who wants to learn about the human rights of Macedonia, here is google's results on the issue:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2Bmacedonia
For anyone who wants to learn about the human rights of Bulgaria, here is google's results on the issue:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2Bbulgaria
For anyone who wants to learn about the human rights of Albania, here is google's results on the issue:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2BAlbania&btnG=Search
For anyone who wants to learn about the human rights of Serbia, here is google's results on the issue:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2BSerbia
For anyone who wants to learn about the human rights of Romania, here is google's results on the issue:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2BRomania&btnG=Search
Compare by yourself. Every single country in the world has been criticised for violating human rights, but now you can compare by yourself and build an oppinion for the human rights in both countries. I sterbinski 18:34, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Human Rights on the Balkan" 

message: To all: I think I have explained my view on genetic researches and ethnicity quite clearly, 4 days ago (Before Miskin was a part of this "genetic" debate), so for those who don't read my posts (and are putting words in my mouth), here it is again:
:Linking genes with national identities is dangerous. I knew about that HLA genes research all about it, but frankly, I don't believe it proves anything. That is why I have never used as it an argument. The involvement of the Macedonian crew in it, is indeed suspicious to me. (I, FlavrSavr actually said that, and I still mean it, though I don't believe their involvement is a proof that they were necessarilly politically motivated) The one thing positive that HLA genetic research proved, is, in my opinion, that the national "purity" of modern nations is, and has always been, a myth.
:Now, what is really dangerous in it, are indeed, the racist conclusions drawn from it "Oh, my nation is more pure than your Sub-saharan tribe". (So Theathenae, that is indeed a racist statement, but I'm still confused why you dislike our faces so much). Such genetic researches or sometimes quasiresearches are always followed by racist sentiments, although they might not be motivated by such sentiments. Just see what the site that VMORO has provided stand for: Essays on a new concept of racial relations that promotes the continued existence, independence and legitimate rights and interests of all races, providing a preservationist alternative to the racially destructive consequences of multiracialism. Destructive consequences of multiracialism?! (I said that, as well)
:Of course, there is this new "ethical racism" (preservation of all races), that tries to avoid (in my opinion), the obvious link, between these guys and Hitler's ideas, but on the site, there are mostly concerns why the "Nordic race" is the one dissapearing. How "serious" these guys are, you can see from map for racial preservation of the US. The website's list of "Estimated percentage genes of modern nations" is composed from god knows what sources. --FlavrSavr 15:37, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As a citizen of RofM, I wish you would comment on Sterbinski's bizarre claims that the research is "unquestioned" (To quote Sterbinski: "Put here any link which says any research of this guy was denied scientifically"---that can be found in the Nature link), and his continued denial to accept what the Nature report implies. His subsequent links do not show what he claims (or thinks) they show. Not addressing this can be seen as tolerating his claims, and that can be seen as an indirect way of supporting his claims and his viewpoint. ---Alex 04:36, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Alex, I'm writing several paragrhaps, It is possible because of a software mistake, to accidentally erase some of your posts. Also, please don't rush in, I have several other issues to add. --FlavrSavr 05:03, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Alright, please watch out for those software "mistakes". Alex 05:07, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I certainly didn't erase your posts if that's what you're implying. KissL suggested that what you viewed as Isterbinski erasing posts, could indeed be a deletion caused by a software mistake. And, again, I'm adding several other points, please be calm :-)--FlavrSavr 05:17, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: The comparison with religious beliefs would not apply, because we are dealing with science, but the comparison with the Palestinians article shows how Wikipedia will basically handle it (detailing the controversy and the standings of the conclusions, problems with it, etc.). I agree it should not be included in Macedonia. Alex 05:13, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Detailing the controversy and the standings of the conclusions, problems with it, etc. But, of course. --FlavrSavr 05:36, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Didn't rush in too much, I'd say. Your link, from my cursory reading, does not "explicitly support" his research, just says that expunging it from the literature is too harsh, that it should still be made accessible (not that its conclusions should be seriously considered). Am I wrong? I'll re-read it. ---Alex 05:42, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not saying that you're wrong, however it appears that political/ethical arguments indeed prevailed over scientific and genetical arguments. See the Observer opinion about this -  --FlavrSavr 06:15, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: And you accuse Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, one of the greatest geneticists of the 20th century; Alberto Piazza, Genetics Dep. University of Torino; Neil Risch, Genetics Dep. Stanford University; as well as the majority of geneticists around the world to have acted unethically on political grounds, not scientific grounds. I do not agree that political issues prevailed here. HLA genes, like other such antigens, are found in different populations largely due to natural selection. There are other types of genes that follow this pattern, and I'll give examples later. Note that the Nature article affirms that natural selection mostly accounts for the distributions. I do not believe that political factors determined this, it just added to the outrage. ---Alex 11:07, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not accusing anybody. See the Observer article which led me to my statement, which again, is my personal POV. And in my statement I'm only saying that the political and ethical arguments prevailed over scientific and genetical arguments. That, on the other hand does not mean that the scientific and genetical arguments were not valid. It simply means that they were possibly considered secondary. Also, I didn't any how insinuate that those famous geneticists were reacting on political basis. I also said that, the whole HLA Genes Research is suspicious to me, and I do not plan to defend it scientifically (Which I cannot do, even if I wanted, because my knowledge of genetics is minute) nor ethically (I'm concerned over the ethical issues of genes research as a method of determining ethnicity, as I already mentioned above). I'm only saying that there other arguments that seem to think that the research was dismissed primary because of political reasons (maybe the research itself was motivated by such reasons, I really don't know) So I would like to ask you, Miskin and I_Sterbinski not to put words in my mouth, and to drag me in to this genetical mumbo-jumbo, again. I don't like to participate in proving something about the research itself: There are people saying this, and there are people saying that about it, and all views should be included. --FlavrSavr 13:12, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: I'm not putting words in your mouth. You gave a judgment, "it appears that political/ethical arguments indeed prevailed or scientific and genetical arguments". I don't think this is totally accurate. The political dimension brought attention to it, but the bad science dismissed it. Alex 13:21, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: And why do you keep mentioning this, unless to take pleasure in it? (see User talk:Bogdangiusca) Alex 13:21, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Flavr, I do support the research (that Pashtun/Pathan have an amount of genes from ancient Greek or ancient Macedonian soldiers in Alexander the Great's army), even though I do not assume that ancient Greeks were genetically identical with ancient Macedonians, nor do I assume that Spartans were genetically identical with Athenians. My own point of view is that there was a genetic variation among ancient Macedonians and neighboring Greeks, but not that much, because of long cohabitation and probable common origin. ---Alex 06:11, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How about this conclusion: The above consideration (Ancient Macedonians=Greeks) has been enforced on a scientific basis due to the results of the research. So, they went there, assuming that Ancient Macedonians were Greeks (even genetically identical), they found Greek genes (not considering the representation of other ethnic grupation's genetic characteristics), and according to Miskin, that enforced that Ancient Macedonians=Greeks. How come, knowing that the Alexander the Great's army was composed of Ancient Macedonians and Greeks (and given the fact that their historical, not to mention genetical kinship is disputed), this link provides that enforced, or definite proof? And what about Mr. Pappaioannou? Isn't his apperance suspicious for the very same reasons that you provided above. Or you are somehow, indirectly supporting his thesis that we are a Slavic crowd, these intelectually and morally inferior creatures?  --FlavrSavr 06:38, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: I do not view this genetic research as proof that the ancient Macedonians were Greeks. Pappaioannou being involved is not to be ignored, but I don't make any allegations on his scientific ethics or competence. I do make allegations concerning the ethics and competence (in terms of genetics) of all the geneticists (or whatever the case may be)---Slavo-Macedonian, Spanish or what not---who were involved with the HLA gene research. Namely, my allegation is that they were unethical and incompetent. I never used the phrase "Slavic crowd", and I don't have the same views about Slavs that Miskin may or may not have. ---Alex 06:54, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. I also do not suspect that Greeks within Alexander's army managed to reach Pakistan. However, I think that you should have dismissed his "definite proofs", especially when he seemingly accepted a racist stereotype, (as well as false accusations against me), with the same vigour that carried your dismissal of Isterbinski's arguments (who on the other hand, didn't claim definite proofs). Bad arguments are bad arguments, regardless which "side" puts them into light. However, this might be my own personal POV of the whole debate, I might be wrong. Regards. --FlavrSavr 07:28, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Bad arguments are bad arguments, but Sterbinski was in denial to the point where I was wondering whether he was insane or a chronic liar. Alex 11:12, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: To be fair, I led him to bring whatever he felt was evidence against the historical consensus that practically all if not all the ancient Macedonians were Hellenized or Romanized before the Slavic arrival. He brought what he may have felt was evidence, but it in fact turned out to not be very good evidence at all, according to the majority of genetic authorities. He denied and perhaps still denies that most geneticists have dismissed that paper, but he is the only one on this talk page who seems to claim this. I'm glad he brought what he brought (what he felt was the best evidence) because now we see how shoddy it is. Alex 11:34, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: I eagerly await the psychotic rant that he will entertain us with tomorrow. ---Alex 15:44, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caution:A genetic research 

message: Another suggestion is that the name means "highlanders", from a Macedonian bahuvrihi maki-kedones "of the high earth", cognate to Greek khthon "Earth".
:Is maki-kedones attested?--Theathenae 15:31, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's just etymological phantasy.  μήκος/μάκος has only been used to denote height (as opposed to length) when it refers to stature of humans, and in one instance  (Aristophanes, the Birds) to refer to the imaginary wall built around Nephelococcygia.  It is quite plain that μήκος can be used to mean height or depth only if one dimension of a three-dimensional object is relevant.  LSJ quite matter-of-factly states that μακεδνός is a form of μηκεδανός.  Homer mentions a tall poplar tree, not one that ... grows on high ground! Chronographos 11:49, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

text: I also do not see much likelihood for "maki-kedones". I fully agree that Makedon has a clear Greek etymology. But apparently, so has the name of this Thracian tribe: Trausi. ---Master Killer 15:50, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Really?  Trausi also has a "clear" Greek etymology?  Your article says that this etymology you mention is merely "more probable" than another, and that "thrauô ... would be a cognate".   There you quite rightly qualify possible etymologies, which are far from "clear".  Furthermore, the Greek derivatives of thrauô are thrausis (breakage, comminution); thraustes, one who breaks; thrausma, shrapnel, etc.  If those skullcrushers did have, or were given, a Greek name, they would be Thraustai, not Trausi.  Not much of a dagger, then: easy to dodge, and dull-bladed too  :-))  Chronographos 16:36, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Chronographos, the inflections thrausai and thrausoi are mentioned in the Perseus entry for thrauô. I didn't say that the ethnonym Trausi has exact Greek inflection, but its most probable etymology is very close to those Greek forms (a clear correspondance, one might say). ---Master Killer 16:46, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I know.  Thrauo is a regular (i.e. easy-peasy) verb, therefore I can conjugate it backwards and forwards from memory. Chronographos 16:49, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Yes, but is that what they called themselves or just what Herodotus and the Greeks chose to call them?--Theathenae 16:19, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

text: I thought about that, but linguists/Thracologists such as Duridanov that I've referenced consider it to be from the Thracian vocabulary. There are other close cognates known between Thracian and Greek, and some linguists even propose a common branch for them. It's always possible that Makedones was originally an exonym as well. ---Master Killer 16:29, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  maki-kedones