Talk:Yane Sandanski

message: Teresa Carpenter provides a statement of Yane Sandanski’s said to Miss Stone in 1901, that in his band “there’s a mixture of nationalities: Serbs, Albanians, Bulgarians, Macedonians, a Jew etc.” This information is taken from the Memoirs of Katerina Tsilka, the other hostage in the Miss Stone Affair. (source: Тегеѕа Сагреntег, The Miss Stone Affair, рg. 40, 2003.) Teresa Carpenter is a Pulitzer winning author and one of the most prominent Miss Ellen Stone’s biographers. Speaking of Sandanski’s fellow highwaymen of many nationalities, Miss Stone herself noticed in her Memoirs, that the leader was a Macedonian pillar. (Miss Ellen Stone, ”Six months among brigands,” McClure’s Magazine, may 1902, pg. 13-14.)
The Greek pro-fascist politician and journalist Eleftherios Stavridis also says that Sandanski claimed that the Macedonians, all of them are neither Bulgarians, Greeks nor Vlachs, but a distinct ethnicity, that the Macedonian population are Macedonians only, pure descendants of the people of Alexander the Great and Philip II of Macedonia, who also weren't Greeks, but their enemies, that subdued them."' 
PRIMARY SOURCE: ”Τα Παρασκηνια του ΚΚΕ” (Ελευθέριος Σταυρίδης), Athens, Greece, 1953, p. 213. ; 
SECONDARY ACADEMIC SOURCES: PhD. Dimitar Ljorovski, Yane Sandanski – an apostle of the Macedonian national idea, “Macedonian Spark,” 11. XI 2011. ; PhD. Dimitar Ljorovski, “Macedonia and Greece on the Balkans,” INI, Skopje, 2014, p. 101-104.)
Iordan666 (talk) 22:39, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: None of the sources you introduced to th article is suitable for an encyclopaedia. This was already explained on this very page to one of your previous incarnations. Please, stop meddling with Wikipedia in your attempt to push your agenda. It will not work just as it failed to work in the past.--Laveol T 07:49, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know what you're talking about. The historian Dimitar Ljorovski Vamvakovski is PhD. and a member of Macedonian Institute of National History (INI). I cite his work and show link to the primary source - Eleftherios Stavridis's memoirs. Iordan666 (talk) 09:51, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: We talk about writings by internationally recognized researchers, published from western universities publishing houses or other western academic publishing houses, not about local biased publications. 88.203.200.74 (talk) 16:05, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Different view, for the ‘Controversy’ section 

message: I found this claim incorrect: “the idea of Macedonian autonomy was strictly political and did not imply a secession from Bulgarian ethnicity.” The secondary source doesn’t say that about the Sandanists, and many other sources dispute it. If I’m wrong, please show me the citation from the secondary source. Iordan666 (talk) 12:19, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Missinterpretation of a secondary source

message: :Image:Pravilnik-sandanski.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:Pravilnik-sandanski.jpg 

message: very doubtful references. :) :) :) anybody could have written these articles from the "promacedonia.org"-site. is there a prove that he declared himself Bulgarian? if not, the "references" should be not listed. 
"published in the "Narodnay volya newspaper in 1909". show it! otherwise that link should be taken out, too.Cukiger (talk) 04:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You're joking. The image is quite visible. --Laveol T 09:56, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

text: You call it ridiculous just because you don't like it. Don't you see it's written that it was first published in the newspaper? Or you don't have to read it in order to call it ridiculous? --Laveol T 08:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: why isnt his name written in cyrillic? either macedonian or bulgarian?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.207.72.93 (talk) 13:36, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I just included the Cyrillic versions of his name; I can't see why there wasn't any uptil now. --iNkubusse? 16:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  name 

message: Please, stop vandalizing the article. Jingby (talk) 08:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV edits 

message: Someone's accused me for vandalism on this article. Can he or she be more specific? 85.30.127.197 (talk) 18:18, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: None has accused you in that. Your talk page is empty as far as I can see. --StanProg (talk) 00:57, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Accusation for vandalism

message: ::An ethnic community has myth of origins and descent, a common history, elements of distinctive culture, a common territorial association, and sense of group solidarity. A nation is, by comparison, much more impersonal, abstract, and overtly political than an ethnic group. It is a cultural-political community that has become conscious of its coherence, unity, and particular interests. (Nation)
Stefan Kemilev, а lawyer from Bulgaria and opponent of Yane Sandanski, witnessed:
His very close and loyal friend Todor Panitsa said:
:- "Who told you that I'm a Bulgarian?! We, the IMRO are not Bulgarians! We are Macedonians! I'm astonished that you, as a Greek communist say something like that. I must explain it to you - You insult us when you call us Bulgarians!" - Todor Panitsa interviewed by Elefterios Stavridis:'Τα Παρασκηνια του ΚΚΕ, Athens, 1953, pg. 209. "Sandanski was an Apostle of the Macedonian nation! ...He claimed that the Macedonians are neither Bulgarians, Serbs, Vlachs nor Greeks, but a distinct ethnicity, and they all are descendants of the people of Alexander the Great and Philip II of Macedonia, who also weren't Greeks, but their enemies, and they defeated and subjugated them." – ibid., pg. 213. 85.30.104.252 (talk) 13:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is Yane Sandanski recognised as a national hero in Macedonia 

message: Here's the changed that have been removed: 
# The correct term is "standard-bearer", not "flag carrier" (flag carrier is just direct translation from Bulgarian)
# Yane Sandanski has never been state employee until 1895. After moving to Principality of Bulgaria (from the Ottoman Empire), he studied and then he served his military service (untill 1894). Since the spring of 1895 he started his revolutionary activity and was part of a cheta.
# Yane Sandanski was not active only in the geographical region, that after 1913 was known as Pirin Macedonia. His activity was through the whole region of Macedonia, and part of Thrace, yet he "fought mainly" in the region of the mountains Pirin & Rila. "Villagers" is to specific term - there were towns in that region as well, so I use the term "population" instead. Most of his life, Yane Sandanski lived outside of the region of Macedonia - mainly in Dupnitsa. He was 42 when died, and he lived about 13 years in that region. That's why I removed the statement "lived". --StanProg (talk) 12:24, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: These edits had been done before I re-reverted my edits, that had been incorrectly removed. Sorry for the inconveniences. Chakmak111 (talk) 20:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latest vandalism by [[User:Chakmak111]] 

message: There are six sources provided in support of the thesis that Silyanov described Sandanski as Bulgarian like all other Macedonian revolutionaries. Yes, he described him as a traitor to the Bulgarian national interests, but as Bulgarian revolutionary. Also Silyanov did not use for anyone the description ethnic Macedonian. I see that with these allegations disagrees only one editor, unlike  others, but he does not open a discussion to a consensus but an useless edit war. How many sources do you need, my friend?78.159.147.70 (talk) 04:38, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:   Hristo Siljanov 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Yane Sandanski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150708215834/https://www.scribd.com/doc/83169059/%D0%90%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BA-%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD-%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%9F%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%B2-%D0%98%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B2%D1%98%D1%83 to https://www.scribd.com/doc/83169059/%D0%90%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BA-%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD-%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%9F%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%B2-%D0%98%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B2%D1%98%D1%83
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:42, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: To weight different views and structure an article so as to avoid original research and synthesis the common views of scholars should be consulted. In many historical topics, scholarship is divided, so several scholarly positions should be relied upon.  Some people masquerading as scholars actually present fringe views outside of the accepted practice, and these should not be used.
To determine scholarly opinions about a historical topic, consult the following sources in order:
# Recent scholarly books and chapters on the historiography of the topic
# "Review Articles", or historiographical essays that explicitly discuss recent scholarship in an area.
# Similarly conference papers that were peer reviewed in full before publication that are field reviews 
# Journal articles or peer reviewed conference papers that open with a review of the historiography.
# Earlier scholarly books and chapters on the historiography of the topic
Surveying these documents should provide you with an understanding of the current scholarly consensus, or the multiple scholarly consensuses held.  Views lying outside of these discussions should be considered as non-scholarly opinions and weighted as such; they should generally be relegated to sections titled "Fringe views." or the like.  In the case that the views are fringe and that the fringe views are not a central item of historiographical debate, the fringe content should be relegated to its own article entirely, discussing the dismissal of the views as fringe views by the scholarly public. None of the above primary sources meet the above criteria. Not to mention that they are interpreted absolutely tensely and are presented selectively, even  some of them are unreliable. Those that are reliable are interpreted quite differently in the secondary sources. I ask these attacks on groups of newly registered users and the new IP-s, behind which there is probably a network with dubious intentions, to adhere to the rules listed above, except for section called "Fringe and parahistorical views."  Jingiby (talk) 09:44, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Please, keep in mind that every sentence in the Lead paragraph, is sourced with reliable academic sources from the recent scholarship that are in the main body (especially in the section Legacy) per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section. Adding in the lead nonsense as: per post-1963 negationist Bulgarian historiography is unrelated to the issue. I can provide direct citations from English language non-Bulgarian academic publication per every sentence into the intro. Please discuss on talk before making such controversial changes in the initial paragraph. By the way per Michael R. Palairet in the three-way dispute about Macedonia, the Bulgarian historical view is closer to the objective reality of history than either the Greek or Macedonian views, but the Macedonian historiographical version violates common sense and the historical record much more than either the Greek or Bulgarian ones. For more see: Michael Palairet, Macedonia: A Voyage through History (Vol. 1, From Ancient Times to the Ottoman Invasions), Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2016, ISBN 1443888435, p. 16. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 08:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources in history