Talk:Georgi Pulevski

Where is it?

Thank you for another reference. Please provide location of original publication. Reference to references is no substitute for the original. We have already gone through this with a previous quoted document that apparently establishing a clear 'Macedonian' ethnicity in the late 19th century. But only the references were provided. Closer inspection and research proved there was no such document and the 'document' was almost certainly conjured up in the 1960s. It only existed in reference, and never in fact. My feeling is that the term 'Macedonian' was never in the original but was introduced in the referencing process. This has often been the case since the 1950s, in the official process of constructing a 'Macedonian ethnicity'. So, where is the original and what does it say? Look forward to it. Politis (talk) 12:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Which do you mean, the "Grammar"? I gave the full bibliographic details, it was published Sofia 1880. Friedman [1] gives the full bibliographic entry as follows: "Pulevski, Gj. (1880) Slavjano-naseljenski-makedonska slognica retovska. Sofia: Ugrin Diikov." Apparently the text is also contained in a modern edition of P's collected works, Gjorgija M. Pulevski, Odbrani stranici., ed. B. Ristovski, Skopje 1974. About the term "Macedonian" being contained in it: Again, according to Friedman, Pulevski in his "Grammar" called the language našinski or slavjano-makedonski; the title translates as "the language of the Macedonian Slavic population". What else is unclear? If you want to insinuate the whole work might be a forgery, the ball is in your field to find reliable sources to that effect; we have absolutely no reason to engage in any such speculation. The work has been described and accepted as authentic in the most reliable of secondary literature (Friedman is the leading authority world-wide). That's really all we need. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Get rid of that Mac-Bul silliness

Can we please release this poor innocent article from the iron grip of the on-Wiki Macedonian-Bulgarian feuds? This whole structure of having a "pro-Macedonian" and a "pro-Bulgarian" section is absolutely awful. You know, guys, even if it's hard to imagine for some of you, there might be readers out there who might actually be interested in other questions than whether he belongs to the one or the other nation. There might even be readers who wouldn't give a rat's.

By the way, why is the whole "Pro-Bulgarian activities" section only quoting primary sources? Let me guess: somebody forgot WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT? Could there be a tiny chance "WHEREYOUGOTIT" was another of those third-rate nationalist websites that's being mimicked here, rather than a reliable secondary source? Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

English language usage

As Fut.Perf. already explained English language usage defines the name of the article. So Google books:

1. Georgi Pulevski 15 hits
2. Gjorgija Pulevski 2 hits

Google Scholar:

1. Georgi Pulevski 14 hits
2. Gjorgija Pulevski 2 hits

To sum it up - on the same bases on which the article Makedosnko devoiche is with the MK transliteration, this one has to be Georgi Pulevski. Any further POV moves will be considered disruptive. --Laveol ^T 18:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

This article has a tinge of pro-Bulgarian tendencies, especially in the last part, with no citations what so over, edited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.56.76 (talk) 15:33, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I am going to readd the last work of Pulevski: “Язичница. Содържающая староболгарски язик, а уредена ем исправена, за да се учат болгарски и македонски синове и керки", where he considered the Macedonian dialects as part of Bulgarian language - ref: Македонизмът и съпротивата на Македония срещу него. Коста Църнушанов, Унив. изд. "Св. Климент Охридски", София, 1992, стр 41. This removal was not explained. Jingby (talk) 12:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

For a change, you should post the part and explain in details where and which part made you believe that Pulevski thought for the Macedonian language as Bulgarian dialect. That will be a great start. You just post the name of the book and you GUESS what did he meant without ever bothering to explain it. That's called propaganda in normal countries. Too bad Bulgaria is not one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljupco79 (talk • contribs) 01:55, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Please, do not remove referenced text. The refrerence is from book published by the Sofia University Publishing house. If you have a question discuss on the talk page. Thank you. Jingby (talk) 08:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

This Google books analysis is old and it is not true. If you check, Gjorgji is more used. --MacedonianBoy (talk) 23:31, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Here is some statistics:

for Google

• Gjorgji Pulevski - 2,940 results on Google
• Gjorgjija Pulevski - 2,640 on Google
• Georgi Pulevski - 2,270 results on Google

just Google Books

• Georgi Pulevski - 66 results on Google Books.
• Gjorgji Pulevski - 213 results on Google Books.
• Gjorgjija Pulevski - 5 results on Google Books.

according to this, the most used name is Gjorgji Pulevski. You should rename the article.--MacedonianBoy (talk) 00:04, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I can't help noticing most of the hits you present are in a language different from English. Like it or not this is the most familiar title for the article. I now know why you want to push a different name, but you simply lack the evidence. --Laveol ^T 14:59, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Start off by searching for Pulevski alone so we can make a list of the variant spellings used before it (then we search for each in quotation marks and note the hits next to each):

• Gorgi Pulevski (77)
• Georgi Pulevski (42)
• Gorgija (M.) Pulevski (41)
• Gjorgji Pulevski (33)
• Djordji Pulevski (17)

Now the task of checking how many non-English results and duplicates come up for each. Please also see Foreign names and anglicization at Wikipedia:Article titles. --124.150.40.224 (talk) 16:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

At Laveol, since you have not read something from him, you can see in his books either Гьоргьи or Ђорђе which in both cases is Gjorgji. Georgi is the modern Bulgarian name and if you insist on neutral names, then George is the neutral English name. --MacedonianBoy (talk) 17:04, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Georgi Pulevski. 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/20060915072155/http://humanities.uchicago.edu/depts/slavic/papers/Friedman-MacLgNatBalkanistica.pdf to http://humanities.uchicago.edu/depts/slavic/papers/Friedman-MacLgNatBalkanistica.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080415012642/http://www.manu.edu.mk/roots/roots.htm to http://www.manu.edu.mk/roots/roots.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:09, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Язичница, содержающая....

Naturee, please stop edit-warring. Your first edit-summary comment: Removal of a source that has no correlation with the person to which this Wikipedia page is dedicated to. is simply illogical claim, hence part from the source is dealing with Pulevski. Your second edit-summary comment: Since user Jingiby could not provide a correct link to the supposed book that is listed in the "Works" section, but provides a link to a book by another author, I am reverting back the edit. is nonsensical too, because I haven't provide any links. I have restored the content deleted without adequate explanation. I didn't upload this source, or the link to it, but only have provided a citation from the book. Nobody asked me for any link on the talk page, or on the edit summary. Here I link to the scanned original of this book written by Pulevski, as well as a link to the scanned original of Kosta Tsarnushanov's secondary academic source, where the topic of this book by Pulevski is discussed, as well as through Google books to the exact citation from Tsanushanov's book. In the same way Tsarnushanov's conclusion is cited by the modern-day Bulgarian historian from Sofia University prof. Aleksandar Nikolov in the study Параисторични сюжети от български автохтонизъм към антички македонизъм. (Parahistorical plots: from Bulgarian autochthonism to Ancient Macedonism.) as follows: ... в последната си граматика, наречена "Язичница. Содержающа староболгарски язик, а уредена ем исправена, да се учат болгарски и македонски синове и керки." той представя македонския език като наречие на българския език....(in his last grammar, called "Grammar. Containing Old Bulgarian, arranged and corrected to may study Bulgarian and Macedonian sons and daughters" he presents the Macedonian as a dialect of the Bulgarian language.) Please specify a link to what is requested and such will be provided and stop deleting citation, academic source and its conclusion. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 06:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Right buddy, you want me to believe that what you just gave was a book written by the person to which this article is dedicated to. If you actually weren't so subjective you would notice that a person who has expressed his identity so freely and wrote several books expressing his ethnic affiliation in the past wouldn't write a book that has no date of writing, that is singed "Georgi Puljevski" instead of "Gjorgji Puljevski" like he signed the rest of his books, a book whose very existence started to appear in post communist Bulgaria, that magically appeared in the 1990's alright let it be then I wont argue, as said Wikipedia is an open platform but this is a community and you seem to think you own this site by looking at your history you wrongly edited back my Vevchani edit without reviewing it, to which another user edited my edit back. You're edits all seem to be argued by almost every single editor, if that doesn't say a lot than I don't know what does. Sorry if this seemed rough as political correctness can only be used with someone who actually can connect the dot's. Have a nice day/night. Naturee (talk) 12:28, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

My friend, as far as I find some data in the Google Books search engine, the Yugoslav researchers in SR Macedonia wrote about this book in 1973 and 1974, that is, long before the Bulgarian ones. Just check: Ѓорѓи Пулевски, Одбрани страници, Македонска книга, 1974 - стр. 14 and Ѓорѓија М. Пулевски и неговите книшки Самовила македонска и Македонска песнарка. Блаже Ристовски. Ин-т за фолклор, 1973 - Скопjе, стр. 19. Jingiby (talk) 12:44, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Last biased changes

I am insisting to revert the article to its stable version. Pulevski cannot be of Macedonian nationality in the sense of the latest biased edits. Macedonian citizenship was first introduced in 1991, and he died a century before that. Regarding his ethnic identity, before the changes done by the recently blocked newly registered user, the text was far more neutral and compromising, and defined him as a Mijak. His ethnic identity problematics is best reflected in the subsection "Identity" that is based on a secondary reliable sources. It is clear that he was the first known forerunner of the separate Macedonian ethnic identity, but with him it is far from the modern Macedonist ideas and coexists with other regional and ethnic identities in different aspect, i.e., Mijak, Bulgarian, Serbian, Orthodox Christian, etc. Let stick to neutrality. Jingiby (talk) 10:35, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps for more neutrality, his ethnic identity could be excluded from the lead altogether, especially when we consider Pulevski's conflicting ethnic identifications. StephenMacky1 (talk) 18:15, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

The stable version was fine and it seems to have already been restored. --Local hero ^talk 18:35, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Mijak = Macedonian

When u click on the link of who are Mijaks it says they are ethnographic group of Macedonians. When u read 2 paragraphs below of Pulevski Wikipedia it says how he fought that Macedonians are separate ethnicity from serbs, bulgarians and greeks.

So what is the problem with saying he is Macedonian Mijak? If this edit gets removed over and over again imma try to contact as many administrators because Jingiby has extreme bias. I am looking every article about North Macedonia and ethnic Macedonians. It says he edits it. Many of the sources are Bulgarian. Ethnic Bulgarian edits about ethnic Macedonian history.

I think maybe i should contact Skopje so they block this website as a form of protest. 46.217.67.206 (talk) 01:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Maybe you did not read the section in the article Mijaks called History? Then you will realize that the Mijaks identified as Bulgarians ans Serbs during Ottoman times and even later. Macedonian nationalism was developed significantly hardly after WWII. You probably did not read to the end this article itself. If so, you will read at the bottom sourced content claiming: Pulevski viewed Macedonian identity as being a regional phenomenon... Pulevski himself identified also as a "Mijak from Galičnik", sometimes described himself as a "Serbian patriot" and also viewed his ethnic designation as "Bulgarian from the village of Galičnik", thus he changed his self-identification several times during his lifetime. Also keep in mind that in the last 20 years the Macedonian question has been debated to death here. Hundreds of sources were analyzed and weighed before being added to the related articles. Macedonian historiography was also examined in details and it is adopted here it to be decidedly revisionist, giving weight to other historical views rather than the Macedonian one. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 03:04, 15 April 2024 (UTC)