Talk:Prespa e Vogël and Golloborda

message: Should this article exist? It's a copypaste of work (my work) from United Macedonia; it's a fork. Please add some more information (translate foreign wiki articles perhaps), otherwise this article is a worthless plagiarization. --Tēlex 20:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Telex, these regions do exist. I really don't know what's the problem? The names are used in every single Slavic country. BTW, the article is stub now. Bomac 20:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: Telex, do you have any sources which claim there are Greeks in these regions? Frankly, I doubt about it. Bomac 21:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The 1987 recorded 58,785 Greeks and only 5,000 Macedonians. Greeks live everywhere in what Greeks call Northern Epirus, which includes the Prespa region (especially the cities of Korçë and Pogradec). --Tēlex 21:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think the fact that Greeks live in Korçë is challenged by anyone - I know it's incompatible with Macedonism, which maintains that the only Greeks in Macedonia (region) are the Pontian refugees, in which case it's impossible that there are Greeks in any other part of Macedonia. If you want to remove the Greeks, you'll have to split the article. --Tēlex 21:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Ah, I notice that :mk:Корча mentions the Vlach and Macedonian minorities, but fails to mention the Greek minority (the largest minority). Macedonism strikes again!!! I agree with your edit Bomac, except I think there may be Vlachs and Torbeshes in Golo Brdo as well - I'm not certain. --Tēlex 21:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Here is a map of the region. I'm pretty certain that Golo Brdo is not in Northern Epirus, in which case there will not be a significant Greek community there. --Tēlex 21:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, part of Mala Prespa is in Greece , does POV pushing have no limit, Bomac? --Tēlex 21:26, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The region is not officially defined. It could even include Thessalonica. --Tēlex 21:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, I know where it is. If I'm not mistaken, Mala Prespa in Greek is Μικρή Πρέσπα Mikrí Préspa, and in Albanian is Prespë e Vogël. --Tēlex 21:31, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the "Greeks" stuff and alike 

message: excuse me, but why a personal blog is allowed to be used as a source? see current footonote no.8, blog hosted at blogspot, URL: http://albania-bulgaria.blogspot.com/2007/04/ethnic-bulgarians-in-mala-prespa-and.html . As far as I can see (correct me if im wrong) the blog itself does not belong to Mrs/Ms. Mangalakova, nor the reference leads to the organisation which she allegedly represents: IMIR - International Center for Minority Studies and Intercultural Relations. This blog is just quoting or referencing her works or something. And finally, who is Mrs. Mangalakova?  --Dzole 00:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right - no personal blogs allowed. I've fixed the link - see if you're able to open it. Jingiby must have added the blog, but there is an official article. --Laveol T 00:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Link

message: i dont understand why we must mention the Bulgarian claims in the intoduction? For example, Republic of Macedonia claims an existence of ethnic Macedonian minority in Greece, which is not officialy recognized, should we now add such Macedonian claims to the introduction of the article Greek Macedonia? --Dzole 15:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction section

message: “I wouldn’t like to offend anyone who would call himself a Macedonian, but in the territory near Lake Prespa there is a school instructing in Bulgarian”. Is what the politician said. He stated there is a school instructing in Bulgarain. He did not "state a presence of ethnic Bulgarians", he just said one school is instructing in Bugarian this does not mean there are any ethnic Bulgarians. Anyone could go to those schools Albanians, Roma's, Aromanians ect... He did not say who is attending that school. Ireland101 16:10, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "presence of ethnic Bulgarians in Albania" 

message: I tried to refrain from politicaly contentious articles for a while but its really impossible, you constantly provoke me to come back.
User: Jingiby despite being blocked for edit warring previously, continues with blatant POV pushing in this article. Also he contuinues with adding questionable sources:
# Footnote number 5: Ташев 1994: 141-162 стр. (what is this and who is this?)
# Footnote number 15: сп. Балканите, бр. 18, 2001, с. 5. 7 Ibid. (what is this?)
# Footnote number 3: Statement referenced to some man named Valeri Grigorov: There is lack of stable ethnic consciousness of this population who easily change their allegiance to either Bulgarian or Macedonian depending on the benefits expected. (end of quote) Obviously a Bulgarian author whose neutrality should be questioned, although allegedly he's speaking from the name of an third party international NGO. 
The only proof that the Organization is "neutral" is Jingiby's statement in his edit summary from 09:19, 14 November 2007, quote: 
INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR MINORITY STUDIES is not Bulgarian belive!. 
If such behaviour is repeatedly allowed in a place that tries to be a serious encyclopedia, then I really dont know what to say. This is obnoxious. I dont have to mention the questionable sources scattered throughout the other Macedonia-related articles ---- Dzole (talk) 19:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good, but still, the person is Bulgarian and I question the neutrality of his statements. But much more important: explain the points No. 1 and 2 mentioned above ---- Dzole (talk) 19:20, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

text: How come only Bulgarian members of that IMIR are quoted here like Grigorov and Mangalakova? Can we have some 3rd party observer? And about that Tashev, the link doesnt lead to his works or statements but  to a news article which quotes him. How should we know what tashev really said, and after all WHO IS HE, and as a Bulgarian author, why should I consider him neutral? The same question about footnote No. 15.---- Dzole (talk) 20:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I see, so:
#You quote an exponent of the official Bulgarian POV? Thats like if I would quote Blazhe Ristevski from MANU or maybe Aleksandar Donski. 
#Moreover that Bulgarian news article says something not so nice about Tashev (like he was using his position to give passports for one day or something, anyway). It says nothing about his academic credentials or his works.
#you quote what some newspaper quoted (a quote of a quote?) you still havent provided a direct link to his particular work where he says what he says.
#one of the links you provided leads me to a personal blog (albania-bulgaria.blogspot.com). I can make a blog myself, can we use such thing as a "source" in an encyclopedia? ---- Dzole (talk) 21:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I just added a "proposed principle" regarding editors relying on political junk propaganda sites  to the Arbcom page (). I invite everybody to help me draw together the relevant evidence for the Evidence page. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disaster 

message: The article seems to imply that the area is homogeneous with Slav inhabitants. That is, Pogradec, Devoll, Librazhd, Elbasan, and Debar are all inhabited by Slav speakers. Do any Albanians live there? --PG-Rated (talk) 20:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The only slavs inhabiting that region are around 5000 according to official censuses. Without mentioning the trollers of this article.sulmues (talk)--Sulmues 19:48, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Area inhabited by Slavs only? 

message: If yes, the title of this article is blatant irredentist propaganda and must be changed asap. We're talking about Albanian territory!--   Avg    20:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've already proposed that to the last POV pusher who wanted this to be an article about Ethnic Macedonians only, but he didn't wanna listen (see section "Proposed move"). Here's the Albanian name (used on De wiki) "Golloborda". Mala Prespa is a different place and the two articles should be split and refer to the geography and so ons of the regions. --Laveol T 20:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's ridiculous the amount of POV pushing these guys do. Let's see how they'll feel when the Albanians will start their own article on the "Albanian territories in RoM" (not simply "Albanians in RoM"). Waiting to see their arguments then.--   Avg    20:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This region does not exist. Simple. There are 5000 people with macedonian descent in albania. If any. Period. Proposed for deletion. I also can make up maps, like these ones. I learned in geography subjects.sulmues] (talk--Sulmues 19:55, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Does this region have an official Albanian name?

message: Enjoy: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ilirida. ESPECIALLY the comments :-) --   Avg    19:04, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't worry - there are even two articles on the same issue - look at Macedonians in Albania. --Laveol T 19:11, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

text: And Greater Albania. It's funny that you accuse us of double standards, because if Aegean Macedonia is nominated, being somewhat equivalent to Ilirida, we would be "FYROMian propagandists". If you don't have anything constructive to do here then go away. BalkanFever 22:24, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, as you see, Aegean Macedonia is not nominated and this speaks volumes about who is what. Oh and rest assured, I will never go away. You'll find me in front of you in every article you'll try to push your propaganda. I'm watching all the articles you've "contributed" to. --   Avg    00:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Can you spell double standards

message: stop the bickering on this article or it will be put up for deletion. Seriously, all nationalistic estimates should be removed from the title and placed further down, under irredentist veiws. OK, this article is really poor and lacks any encyclopedic value. Laveol you are constantly pushing a pro-bulgarian agenda while ignoring the facts. This page is over-referenced with political and pro-macedonian/pro-bulgarian references. If these people are bulgarian then they will declare themselves as such, same case with albanians and macedonians. These figures which you are referencing declare all Ethnic Macedonians to be bulgarian as well, so they are not to be trusted. 
This article has become a sham. Could someone please cut to the chase and make it a valid encyclopedic article. And could someone please tell me why the bulgarian version of the name is still bieng put up in a region which is shared between macedonia and albania???? PMK1 (talk) 05:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why the sudden turn? Just a couple of days ago you said there was no reason to remove the Bulgarian name. And that you were going to create a geographical article from this one. And now you urge someone to remove the POV? Why did you change your position? --Laveol T 08:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  people please! 

message: Guys, this does not make sense any more. First of all, this article is about region in Albania NOT region in Bulgaria as Laveol want to represent. Second think is that this is not correct name about the article. This two names Mala Prespa and Golo Brdo are two different places, not one region. Mala Prespa is near Prespa Lake and Golo Brdo is near Struga Debar region. This is article about geography and not about nationalities in AL and not especially article where BG propaganda will be spread away. We have article about Macedonians in AL and that is enough. I suggest that this article should be separated into two different articles Mala Prespa one and the other Golo Brdo.AND the articles should be strictly about geography not ethnicity or what ever. --MacedonianBoy (talk) 09:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: SINCE, this article is about non-official geographical region, the population section should be deleted and we can just m,mention what nationalities live there.--MacedonianBoy (talk) 09:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all it was me that proposed that some time back and again a couple of days ago. And it was not me that added the info about Bulgarians and it was not Bulgarian contributors that started the United Macedonia thing here as well. I wonder where the users that started it come from. AND it was me that proposed the articles to be split, but users from MK didn't want this to happen. It would be nice if you had at least read the whole discussion before throwing lame accusations and pretend to provide a dispute resolution or something. --Laveol T 19:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A sudden 180 degree turn at the same time from a group of editors? Let's just say it's interesting and I'll leave it at that.--   Avg    20:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Actually laveol it is more appropriate if both macedonian and bulgarian are removed. And i am sick of the nationalistic propaganda that everyone is trying to get across. Does anyone mind if a add more villages to the list?? Also Radoeshtë (Радоешта) seems very similar to village radozda just across the border?.PMK1 (talk) 23:44, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is, but tell that to MacedonianBoy. --Laveol T 23:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, laveol but you seem confused! Who has started the article and who has put there that useless BG passports and tried to Bulgaraize the population? Me? Stop offending or I will start to Macedoniza your article about some BG in Albania.--MacedonianBoy (talk) 07:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

text: No threats, please. --Laveol T 12:56, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Since you understood, it is good and clear. Cheers--MacedonianBoy (talk) 19:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's not clear. Mala Prespa and Golo Bardo are paer of the region of Macedonia. The primary thing that is associated with the name Macedonia is the region. The map is confusing in the sense it shows the land in red outside the region. Further WP:MOSMAC is specific enough - this should be Republic of Macedonia.--Laveol T 20:23, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: Please, try reading the sentence before editing it. What kind of an expression is: "with other smaller minorities including some small number of Bulgarians and some small number of Turks". It already says that those minorities are small in the first part of the sentence, why do you want it to be in the second as well. I understand that you want to minimize the Bulgarian issue as much as you can, but try doing it in proper English, please. --Laveol T 22:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  MacedonianBoy 

message: Split, I have propsed that the article be split into Mala Prespa and Golo Brdo. They are two different regions of Albania and grouping them together is unencyclopedic. Just because they are both in Macedonia does not mean that they should have the same article. PMK1 (talk)07:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Support - already proposed such a thing somewhere on the talkpage. --Laveol T 21:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Does any one else support or object? PMK1 (talk) 01:15, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split Proposal 

message: Instead of deleting the article, as it is proposed by one user, we can put split tag and divide the article into two, Mala Prespa and Golo Brdo. No reason foe deleting since we can use the given data, which will make the work easier.--MacedonianBoy (talk) 14:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, but shouldn't we name it after the Albanian nameplaces, if we do perform such a split? I mean, those places are in Albania, not? --Laveol T 21:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I did not pay attention to that while writing the comment. I wanted to say about the split only, but if the community agree, let they be in Albanian same as the present one with other names in the intro + the redirections.--MacedonianBoy (talk) 00:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's split the article if deletion is too heavy for anybody. I proposed it for deletion and now I think the split as proposed by MacedonianBoy is the best solution. Two articles: 1. Prespa e Vogel and 2. Golloborda. They are completely unrelated regions where Bulgarians have lived historically. The areas are to be redefined though, as Prespa e Vogel's area is incorrectly presented in the map. Your thoughts. sulmues (talk) --Sulmues 20:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

text: I'm not opposed to splitting the article in principle, however, I'd like to see some more content before splitting. The article as it stands is about the nationalist concept, not geographical regions. In order to split the article, it should discuss the regions and the minority/nationalist issues can then be mentioned at the end.--Ptolion (talk) 21:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine with me. sulmues (talk) --Sulmues 22:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

text: Sounds good to me Mactruth (talk) 16:56, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

text: There was obviously concesus to split the page, but no one has been brave enough to have a go. I have created new articles using the Albanian names identified above. I have no axe to gring regarding the regions as such, so if I have made a total mess of it then by all means revert. In light of the discussions above, I would suggest that redirect pages using the Bulgarian and Macedonian names be created. Hope this helps Op47 (talk) 20:19, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The split tag 

message: I suggest this page be deleted.  It's not a disambiguation page, but rather a page containing two regions.
The only reason this is here is because there is a redirect Albanian Macedonia that links here.
And the only pages that link to that redirect are the two regions themselves Mala Prespa and Gollobordë, and there the term is listed only in the See also section.
In short, there is no reason to disambiguate a term that is just a listing of the two regions and no compelling reason to preserve a redirect that is not helpful.  It doesn't make sense to keep this page just because of the redirect.
I suggest deleting both this page and the redirect Albanian Macedonia.  If it makes sense for each region to link to the other in the See also section, then put a link to the other region with a brief explanation of why the two regions are related.  That makes a lot more sense than linking to a redirect that points to the other article and also back to the same article in which the redirect appears.  This is all so circular it's basically meaningless, and unnecessarily confusing. Coastside (talk) 23:56, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggest delete