Talk:Macedonian Partisans

message: Im currently reviewing some recently added sources. they are supposed to support the recently added statments that this army was "part of the yugoslav movement". Most of them will be removed:
*,  Утрински весник, Раѓањето на македонската држава 
Reason for deletion:  Its misenterpreted for political reasons: It says:
Македонскиот народ првпат во својата историја имаше сојузници и со југословенските народи, на чело со КПЈ, се вклучи во антифашистичката коалиција (The Macedonian people for the first time in its history had allies and with the Yugoslav peoples, led by the Yugoslav Communist party, it (the Macedonian people) joined the antifascist struggle.)
Theres no explicit statement saying the "The Macedonian Liberation Army was a Yugoslav army". On contrary, it says that the Macedonian movement was an ally to the Yugoslav one led bythe Communist Party of Yugoslavia (like it was an ally to the US, British and Soviet). 
::This is sophistic, and very false at that. The army of the ethnicities of Macedonia was the same as the army of all ethnicities of Yugoslavia, commanded by one headquarters with a top commander Tito: this was Yugoslavian army -- in words and in deeds. Its aim was to restitute the state of Yugoslavia, and it achieved this aim. Macedonian ethnicities were not allies of the Yugoslavian army, they were part of it. They were allies to US, British, and Soviet, but they were not part of those armies, because they were not under direct command of US, British, and Soviet. Lantonov 08:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't say anything about the form of the "moral support" either. Taken together with other sources which you deleted, we see that the "moral support" are Tito's emissaries like Tempo. Lantonov 08:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Polemic is also a source of information. Lantonov 08:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The fact that the credibility of the source is not clear to you, is not a reason to delete it. There are people for whom the credibility of the source is clear. Lantonov 08:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The relevance is questioned by whom? You? Do not delete a source, only because of you believing otherwise. Lantonov 08:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent deletions

message: Quotes from Jingby's tendentious  pro-Bulgarian "contributions":
"The Yugoslav Partisans, under the command of Josip Broz Tito, drawing on a communist ideology to win support that crossed national lines, steadily gained power during the struggle, winning recognition from the Allies and the government-in-exile as the Yugoslav legitimate fighting force." 
RE: The Kingdom of Yugoslavia's royal government in exile supported the royalist and anti-communist chetniks of Draza Mihajlovic (Royal Yugolsav Army in the Fatherland). They were enemies to the communist resistance.
The Yugoslav People's Liberation War in Vardar Macedonia started in October 1941
RE: another nonsence. As explained in the section above, for a long part of the war there was no contact between the Yugoslav and the Macedonian movements. Tempo (Tito's envoy to Macedonia) came later, not in 1941. Later the Macedonian army was indeed joined to the Yugoslav forces but that was at the end of the war when Macedonians were sent to the Srem Front in 1945 against their will, for which they started an unsucesful revolt in Skopje (mentioned in the National Liberation War of Macedonia).
"But the situation here was specific. Metodi Shatarov - Šarlo, a leading member of the Yugoslav Communist Party for Vardar Macedonia refused to define the Bulgarian forces as occupiers (contrary to instructions from Belgrade). The CPY formally decided to launch an armed uprising on July 4, 1941 but Šarlo refused to distribute the proclamation of calling for military actions against Bulgarian army."
RE: This is controversial. Its true he was considered a "traitor" by the SFR Yugoslav and the SR Macedonia's historiography, however, after the breakup of Yugoslavia, the Macedonain press published Shatorov letters in which he clearly defines the Bulgarian amry as occupators. Having no sources at the moment I will not add that to the article. On the other hand, Shatorov is irrelevant to this article, because its an article about the army in which he didnt take part. This is not a general overview of the WWII in today's Republic of Macedonia. For that you have National Liberation War of Macedonia so dont fork the content.
With the ongoing war and after eliminating of Šarlo new anti-fascist partisan squads were constantly formed and in 1942 a total of nine small partisan detachments were active in Vardar Macedonia and had maintained control of mountainous territories around Prilep, Skopje, Kruševo and Veles. 
RE: again irrelevant informations. Jingiby, having absolutely no military knowledge, in his blind nationalist campaigning against Macedonian articles fails to note a difference between:
a) Partisan guerilla detachments (the innitial stage of the resistance)
b) Army, which is a more complex organization including officers and their hierarchy , a unit structure such as: batalions, brigades and all that, then heavier weaponry (because they captured some after the capitulation of Italy) and so on.
So, in the later course of the war, there was an ARMY which fought frontal battles like any other regular army AND there were remaining PARTISAN DETACHMENTS who fought a guerilla warfare to support THE ARMY. The armed forces as a whole were called People's Liberation Army of Macedonia (NOV) AND Partisan Detachments of Macedonia (POM).
On November 1942, the Partisan leaders of Yugoslavia convened the first AVNOJ meeting at Bihać, in the hope of gaining political legitimacy. 
RE: how is this related to the Macedonian National Liberation Army?
Because of the unwillingness of local Communists for mass struggle against the Bulgarian Army, the Supreme Staff of CPY took measurements of strengthening the campaign. The policy of minimal resistance changed towards 1943 with the arrival of the Montenegrin Svetozar Vukmanović-Tempo, who began to organize an armed struggle. 
RE: This is Jingybis personal interpretation of why Tito sent Tempo to Macedonia. Others say for example that Tito sent Tempo to put the already active autonomous Macedonian movement under Yugoslav control. I have no sources to support that right now, nor Jyngby has for his claims and so this will be removed.
Overview of Jingibis "sources":
*Partisans: War in the Balkans 1941 - 1945 by Dr Stephen A. Hart. BBC History Published: 2006-06-22
RE: Macedonians are mentioned in a completely different context (as one of the ethnic groups that populated Yugoslavia). There is no excplicit statement saying "The Macedonian army" was part of the Yugoslav.
* The Resistance and the Struggle for National Liberation 1941 - 1946 Survey of the People's Liberation War - Colonel Fabijan Trgo
RE: First of all, Marxist org? Second, this text was published in 1966, normally it represents an ideological persepctive of the former SFR Yugoslav historiography.
*The People's Antifascist Liberation War Veteran Association, Bitola, Republic of Macedonia
RE: This is a wider overview, includes acts of resistance such as demonstrations, boycotts and what not. Its not a website about the army, thats why i removed it last time. It does indeed mention the Provincial Comittee of the Yugoslav Communist Party for Macedonia (МК-КПЈ) however there's not much about THE ARMY itself, its goals etc. Also, it covers events that occured only on a certain territory (Bitola and the surrounding), with certain exceptions such as when the Bitola units or individuals were involved in some events that occured somewhere else.
* Кои беа партизаните во Македонија - Никола Петров, Скопје, 1998 
This is a personal Bulgarian nationalist website maintained by  Vassil Vassilev Karloukovski, a professor of geography and minerology, whose academic credentials have nothing to do with military history. Moreover, this text "Who were the partisans" which is hosted at Karlukovski's personal web library is written by an openly biased author, whose academic reputation (if any) is highly questionable. He is widely if not totaly irrelevant in the scientific circles in his country, Republic of Macedonia. Unfortunatelly this questionable source is used in many other Macedonia-related articles, which is a great damage to Wikipedia's reliability. This "source" will not go, until Im alive.
::This source is a book, not a web site, so that the qualifications of the maintaner of the site referred to above are totally irrelevant. When you speak with such "authority" about the irrelevance of Nikola Petrov, you must give sources to support this argument. You give no sources, only your beliefs and judgements. Therefore, this source is completely relevant, and should be cited as often as possible because it is free of Macedonist propaganda and relies completely on original primary sources. From this book, it is evident that Nikola Petrov is a very accurate and conscientiuos contemprary RoM historian. Lantonov 06:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There was NOT such a thing as ethnic "Macedonians" at the time. The term "Macedonian" for the Yugoslavic Bulgar minority was invented after the fall of Tito just for having a national identity and a supposed historical presence in the area.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.118.191.48 (talk) 00:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pure nonsence

message: First - read the article about him in Wikipedia Svetozar Vukmanović-Tempo. He is described not from me as follows During World War II he served on the Supreme Staff, .... and became Josip Broz Tito's personal representative in Macedonia.
Second - read the next articles from Open society Arhives where he is described at the same way. Jingby 19:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The above statement shows a great disrespect for the Wikipedia, and the Wiki idea as whole. The refusal to read Tempo article overturns the whole argument, as it is seen that one side of the discussion refuses to even consider the evidence presented by the other side on a basis of preconceptions. Lantonov 09:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  From August 1943 to November 1943 is a period of 3 months, not "a couple of years". Lantonov 09:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

text:  Sources are not in "standard Macedonian" because "standard Macedonian" did not exist at this time -- it was created in 1945 by Tito's order. Jазикот дека го сборуваате беше Б'лгарски (even not Бугарски). The "Macedonian" movement "wanted" to be independant? Or "Macedonian" writers half a century later wanted it to be "Macedonian"? "Absorbed" by whom? By Tempo? You do not have sources for your claims but that does not mean that sources supporting the opposite claim are unreliable. There was a resistance - fact: Yes, primarily in regions of Yugoslavia occupied by Germans and Italians - fact. There was Macedonian Army - non-fact: There was Yugoslavian Army. There was Macedonian general staff - false: There was Yugoslavian general staff led by Tito, and Macedonian regional staff, led by the Tito's emissary Tempo. Official "commanding language"? If you refer to "Macedonian", it became official later - 1945, only in the Yugo Republic Macedonia. If we add the fact that Tempo and his entourage spoke Serbian, this statement is also false. Lantonov 07:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The fact that you do not know about ethnicities does not give you the right to remove sources written by participants in the events. They speak about Serbs, Albanians, Tsintsars, Vlachs (true, not Martians). Lantonov 09:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

text: What if the sources are from older period. They must be older, because we are not talkin about a recent event. Lantonov 09:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The fact that Macedonian participants did not reach Jajce has no significance. It means only that decisions were taken without them. Those decisions were implemented, in many instances forcefully, and no one of the Yugoslav command cared for excuses of the Macedonian delegation for not participating. Lantonov 09:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: About Tempo

message: This article is a clear case of one person judging history written by many and executing them in one sweep by deleting their sourced contributions. What is left as "sources" he deemed reliable is only a site of RoM Ministry of Defence that by definition contains propaganda material (unsourced of course). Lantonov 07:03, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is exactly the problem with your thinking and your edits -- that in every historical source you want to see the name "Macedonia" and "Macedonian". Well, in most of those sources there is no "Macedonian" simply because it was not. This is true for the language, for the nationality, for the names of the armies, the goals of struggles, etc. In many of the sources in which you are looking for "your" history there is the word "Bulgaria" or "Bulgarian" instead. There are two solutions to this problem that Macedonists use: either strike out "Bulgarian" and replace it with "Macedonian", or write a long and winded explanation that by Bulgarian one must understand "Macedonian". You invented a third solution: delete sources that do not mention the word "Macedonian". I find some consolation in the fact that something similar happens with "Yugoslavian" vs "Macedonian". Lantonov 07:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very credible for this statement. Read a history of Bosnia, and you will be enlightened on the matter. Even read Serbian historians, like Corovic and Cvijic, they write the same thing. For the sake of completeness, it must be added that muslim Bosniaks are also descendants of Croats, and of Bogomils with Serb or Croat origin who lived in Bosnia (and Herzegovina -- herzeg Stephan) long ago (14-16 centuries). Lantonov 07:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Muslim is a religion, not nationality. It is like me saying that I am a Christian by nationality. Lantonov 07:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Your explanations about deletion are very unsatisfactory and only show your bias. I will not comment on them only because I do not have enough time but it is very easy to spot the bias for a person who knows facts about Bulgarian history. As for National Liberation War of Macedonia, I did not breach a single rule, on the opposite, I tried to make one of your (and my, unfortunately) compatriots to observe the rules and not to add Macedonist propaganda lies and vandalize the page. He did not listen, went on the way of personal attacks and was banned because of it. Lantonov 06:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I consider your explanations completely unsatisfactory and your bias is more than obvious, not only here but in many other Macedonia-related articles. You constantly push that BBC link which doesnt mention anything about the ARMY we are talking about, nor about Apostolski, nor about Tempo nor about Chento nor about anything relevant to this subject here. It doesnt even mention it as for example "Yugoslav Army for Macedonia" or "Operations of the Yugoslav Army in Macedonia". It says nothing. It may be useful for People's Liberation Army of Yugoslavia (i doubt) but not here.  This is an article about the People's Liberation Army of Macedonia. Speaking of the Bosnians, although its an offtopic, in the SFRY they were officialy recognized under that neologism Muslims by nationality, whatever that means I dont care, its a fact  --Dzole 17:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Regarding Bosnians:(Agreed. I would say that it is a strange creation of Serbo-Yugoslavian ruling circles, but the fact is a fact. They cannot even boast originality - mixing religion with ethnicity is done from time to time throughout history. Lantonov 09:06, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Do not put words in my mouth, which I never said. First, I never said that Macedonian nation is "fabricated" so that this is not my problem. My problem (and a problem of any responsible person) is with people who misinterprete and fabricate (yes, fabricate, forge, fake, falsify, as is the case with the "Proclamation of Kresna-Razlog Uprising") historical sources, or, which is worse, delete sourced material that does not correspond with their views or beliefs. Second, I did not say that ASNOM did not exist. What I say is that it was commanded by Tito, and his emissaries, and this is based on sources. The fate of Cento, and other persons who were killed, and imprisoned because they differed with the high command with respect to the aim of the resistance, only comes to support the view that ASNOM was created as part of Yugoslavian resistance despite the last letter of the acronym. Now, if you say that with this I am pushing an Yugoslavian, or Serbian POV, I will only be obliged for the kind words. Lantonov 07:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources?

message: The image :File:Bat Mirce Acev.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --17:33, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:Bat Mirce Acev.jpg