Talk:Macedonia (terminology)/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

To the single purpose account

Please, note all the nonsense you've created on the page. This must be the only article on Wikipedia stating something like: "Macedonians of Macedonia are..." I understand that you, for some reason, dislike the denominator Slav, but in this case it is clearly needed or the sentence would make no sense (as it does now). --Laveol ^T 01:00, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, here we go... Firstly, I quote a text from the article:

"...the territory appears to correspond to the basins of (from west to east) the Haliacmon (Aliákmonas), Vardar / Axios and Struma / Strymónas rivers, and the plains around Thessaloniki / Solun and Serres / Seres."; where you deleted the Macedonian name for Thessaloniki, and for Serres. Since you mention Greek names of Macedonian rivers (Struma and Vardar with Strymonas and Axios) it is fair to mention the Macedonian names of the (nowadays) Greek cities which are officially recognized in the Republic of Macedonia under these names that I added.

Secondly, I quote: "Danforth stresses, however, that the more moderate Macedonian position, publicly endorsed by Kiro Gligorov, the first president of the Republic of Macedonia, is modern Macedonians have no relation to Alexander the Great, but are a Slavic people whose ancestors arrived in Macedonia in the sixth century AD."; what an oxymoron is this! Moderate Macedonian position is that Macedonians are not Macedonians but only Slavs. I fail to see the logic behind these words. Do you see it?

Further, that 'politics' was not an 'official' one - it was personal, subjective attitude of both the former President of the Republic of Macedonia and of Danforth (as in the source quoted from him there wasn't any sources listed for this allegedly official stance in politics by the Republic of Macedonia). I don't see anyone else speaking something similar, nor the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Republic of Macedonia has declared this or any similar concept / statement as an official one. Thus, it is not an official one. The official one is the one I wrote in the article. As is the private one of most of the people around the Republic. Hence, you have no right of reverting that edit.

I continue to quote: "'Macedonist (Македонист) is a term for a person (typically Macedonian Slav) who believes that Macedonian Slavs are not ethnic Bulgarians but a separate ethnic group, directly descended from the ancient Macedonians. It is a more negatively charged synonym of "Macedonian nationalist"."

There is no such thing as Macedonian Slav. There are Macedonians. Macedonian Slavs along with Skopians and similar terms are used in pejorative and offensive manner, and mostly by Greek officials and people, but not by most of the other countries and people in the world. Thus, you cannot delete my edits, again. So please refrain from editing wars with me, as you are wrong. You are even more wrong because you are a moderator, and you should know better.

And I go further, quote: "Old Church Slavonic is rarely referred to by ethnic Macedonians as "Old Macedonian" or "Old Slavic"";

Old Church Slavonic is ALWAYS referred to by ethnic Macedonians as "Old Slavic" (more often) and "Old Macedonian" (less so). I know from first-hand experience, as I use the same wording.

Oh please, tell me I am, again, mistaken. MakedekaM (talk) 02:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

And another thing, not relevant to this dispute: this is not a single-purpose account. I am reading Wikipedia since it was conceived, and I was editing without an official account. I did not make this account to be editing only this article (though I find it interesting and daring). MakedekaM (talk) 02:28, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, I have to say from the edit pattern that I might be familiar with your previous edits. You've been pushing a certain POV and you are well aware of it. Also, I don't think you get the point. You cannot write Macedonians are Macedonians, cause it is... well, it is plain stupid. It's quite obvious that A is actually A, no? Should we have an article on this? No. You've obviously failed to see what the article is trying to explain. You've missed the whole point (that this is not a Great Macedonia political pamphlet, but an encyclopaedia). Therefore, I suggest you get familiar around here before continuing with the stubborn and pointless edit-warring.

I keep explaining again and again. Macedonian Slavs means Slav people from the region of Macedonia. You must know what Slavs are. Denying ethnic Macedonians have anything to do with Slavs is only in the politically driven agenda of some hard-line parties in RoM. I am amused with the way you nationalize rivers and it just comes to show the purpose of your presence here. --Laveol ^T 10:26, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I really don't care what you are explaining. The article is confusing enough. There is NO SUCH ETHNIC GROUP CALLED "Macedonian Slavs". There are ethnic Macedonians. Or, shortened, Macedonians.

And please, point me the place where I wrote "Macedonians are Macedonians" :))) You're obviously not very lucid when reading these articles, but your nationalistic drives keep you awake in the endless nights, editing and reverting changes to articles you care about. Why don't you get some sleep? I believe you're deprived of it.

When we're at that - where are you from, Laveol? Can I guess? Bulgaria. Riiighttt... wasn't Bulgaria the country that denies separate Macedonian ethnicity and separate Macedonian language (which both are recognized by all relevant international institutions)? It is. So this 'Macedonian Slav' term that you coined, it looks just right for the purpose - deny ethnicity. Tell me about nationalistic POV pushing, then.

Oh, and, let me quote yourself (this is hilarious): "Denying ethnic Macedonians have anything to do with Slavs is only in the politically driven agenda of some hard-line parties in RoM." :)))

You are so blinded by your propaganda that you don't even know what to write anymore. As far as I want to argue with your pointless argumentations, I will just quote this part of the changes I posted: "...the more moderate Macedonian position, is that modern Macedonians have common relation to both Slavs and ancient Macedonians (thus relation to Alexander the Great)."

You must be getting that funny feeling in your stomach that tells you that you were UTTERLY WRONG. :))) I never did say (and the official position of our country isn't) that we have no connection with the Slavic people - we do, and we do have with ancient Macedonians, too. I did that edit on the wrong place, though, as it was quotation of Danforth, but including just one single man for this complex issue in quotes is QUESTIONABLE ENOUGH and obvious POV PUSHING. Also, please go and read his article - I'd like for you to point his citation of an official document from RoM, where it says that this is the official stance of RoM. If you don't, then it means that ANYONE COULD'VE WRITTEN THAT ARTICLE AND CLAIM WHATEVER THEY WANT, and that THEIR OPINION WOULD STILL BE VALID TO BE QUOTED (pretty quasi-science that you're, oh, so familiar with).

Oh yes, and about the names: hahah, are you slow or? I mean, using your own wording, "I am amused with the way you nationalize rivers and it just comes to show the purpose of your presence here."; isn't calling rivers in Republic of Macedonia with Greek names nationalizing? Or, it doesn't count, eh? What does count? Your nationalistic stance? So, when calling a river that originates and mainly goes through RoM (Vardar is this one) and the other which is located in the south-western part of Bulgaria (which, interestingly enough, was given or was taken by force by Bulgaria in the Balkan wars, and not by natural secession and inclusion) and in which native Macedonian population WAS living until Bulgarian authorities began exterminating them and forced propaganda on them, and the rivers do have Macedonian names (Vardar and Struma), but yet, the Greek ones are mentioned. The question is, when other geographic places do have Macedonian names, how hypocritical it is to delete the Macedonian names and leave only the Greek ones?! :))) I told ya, you really need to get some sleep.

I am requesting for an independent committee of arbiters to solve this issue. And I will be reverting the changes you do, until you give proofs for your claims. You look just plain funny in this way. MakedekaM (talk) 13:33, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

This has gone far enough. I suggest you stop shouting (using capital letters), stop with the personal attacks and try acting as if you're discussing something, not going to war. Starting with "I really don't care what you are explaining" is not the way to go into a discussion, you know. I do not wish to continue this until you drop the nationalistic rhetoric (the stuff about the land and rivers being stolen, about the extermination of the population etc). These are serious allegations and as I already said, characteristic of only the most extreme nationalists in the Republic of Macedonia. This is not the way a wiki user should act. Go ahead and read what you wrote and review your behaviour. Thank you. --Laveol ^T 14:32, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

You are a tough guy on words, but not so tough on facts. Obviously. You have no idea how a discussion should go. I choose the way I lead my discussions. You can brag about my 'nationalistic' attitude, 'nationalistic rhetoric' and more of those strong words :))) but it won't help you in disapproval of the facts. Because facts are facts, and pure words and phrases that convey facts are the best. Not YOUR nationalistic rhetoric which you so desperately try to hide behind nice words and phrases. Please refrain from engaging into discussion with me and reverting changes on the article if you are not ready to offer counter-facts and if you only know to throw strong words that have nothing to do with the current discussion. Thank you. MakedekaM (talk) 17:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I see you have no interest in a discussion. If claiming rivers, lakes, mountains etc in the name of a certain ethnic group is the only fact you'll provide, then be so. If you do not wish to listen to the others, then be so. Mind that your next revert will be reverted, especially since you do not wish to discuss it. --Laveol ^T 18:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

This article has evolved to the state it is now by thorough cooperation between many editors from all the nations involved as well as many outsiders. Those editors agree that it is as balanced as it can be, and have successfully managed to promote the article to featured article status. Anyone who proposes changes to the article which disturb that balance should come with strong supportive evidence for his proposed changes. I think the root of the problem discussed here is that in the nations involved, education on the history and present state of the region of Macedonia is very different, and none of them present a balanced overview of the facts. My impression is that Laveol, though his work on this and other articles, has come to realise that what he was taught in Bulgaria is only part of the story. MakedekaM has been taught another part of the story, but doesn't yet realise this. I hope he will, some day soon. The matter of the names of the rivers being given in both their Greek and Macedonian (Republic) version is because these rivers don't have a generally accepted name in English, so because they flow in both the Republic of Macedonia and in Greece, both names are given for the sake of neutrality. For the cities, the name under which they are know in English happens to be their Greek names, which is not surprising since they are entirely in Greece today. I can't imagine that there is any political reason why the names are given as they are. Preslav (talk) 19:31, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

This article is about territorial dispute not terminology. It is not an "excpetion" to WP:NATOADICTIONARY

This article is about the territorial dispute which manifests in different use of the term Macedonia. As such, the article is not really about the word Macedonia. It is about what the word points to. Thus it is not a true exception to the policy Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Please comment at my talk page if this stimulates your intellect and you wish to discuss it further. Thank you for your thoughtfulness.Bard गीता 06:27, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Macedonia term and modern usage - Compose of a neutral map

Macedonia first of all is an ancient kingdom and then everything else. To what you refer as macedonia boundaries in this page, you refer only the last 100 years. I guess we miss some thousands years of definition. This page lack of information, facts, and education. What you call boundaries of Macedonia todays, you refering to the Turkish Vilayet of Thessaloniki, Monastir and Kosovo. However due the Ottoman Empire period, nowhere is reffering to the area as macedonia. However Turks make their vilayets not according to geographic term or ethnic groups areas, but they make vilayets according to the mix of population, because this cause less revolts and plus the local nations fight each other. Also in all Ottoman censuses, nowhere is mentioned any "macedonian" nation. So where was located Macedonia the previous centuries? Macedonia due the Byzantine period referred to the Themas of Thessaloniki, Strymon and Macedonia (which located in todays East Macedonia and Thrace. Evidence of that we can find into the Bulgarian Nationalism in the first and second wars and in the some previous years. VMRO, an originally Bulgarian organization which claims Macedonia to unite it with rest Bulgaria, was set mainly by Bulgarians, which Greeks and Albanians join in common goals of sending Turks away. Bulgarians refer to Macedonia as it was the Themas of Thessaloniki, Strymon and Macedonia, plus the Shopluk area. In Byzantine period Macedonia Thema was in the area of Adrianople, which VMRO claims also as Macedonia (See Bulgarian Nationalism and maps related to VMRO). VMRO exist as organization till today with claims over Vardar region due the high Bulgarian population in Shopluk area. Also there is another new VMRO of Skopje origin created the last decade and is the current political party and government in Skopje (FYROM). For the record, Bulgarians and Slavs came in the region of Balkans in the 6th century AD according of what they say and their history. Macedonia thema was relocated in late Byzantine period for strategic reasons and mainly due of the came of Bulgarians and Slavs in the area of Balkans after the 6th century and the wars between Byzantines and Bulgarians. In Roman period Macedonia was a cross road and located mainly from Durres in Albania all across the "Egnatia Odos". Is impotant to mention that Skopje city is all that period, never was part of Macedonia. However the City of Skopje original name was Scupi (Roman), Shkupi(Illyrian) and proof of that is the even latest period of Ottoman Empire which the City of Skopje known as Uskup, the name Skopje is recently invented and name it. Before even the Roman period, was the Hellenistic Era, even in that time Skopje city was not into the Macedonia's borders. There are questions such, why Alexander the Great spread Hellenism and not Macedonian stuffs if he spoke another language? Why he order Athenean Greek ships to explore red sea and find a route to India? What for was the Oath of Alexander in Opis? Why left no evidence of "Macedonism" instead all left are Greek if Macedonia and Greece was two different things? Probably because Macedonia is nothing more than Greece. What about the Kingdoms after Alexander's the Great era? Why Alexander had Greek teacher and not macedonian if it's different language? How they communicate? And for those who believe that Philippos does not like rest Greeks, why he teach Greek to his son and why he had Greek name as he and his son? Let's go to some definition. In ancient Greece there was no single thing called Greece, but there was region cities/states which fought each other and make alliances for glory and power. Notable is the Peloponnesian war which keeps for 50 years between Sparta (Lakaidemonians) and Athena. Each side had other Greek region cities/states as their alliances. For example Macedonia was with Sparta and Thebes with Athena etc. However when the so called Barbarians came in the area, Greeks stop fight each other, they form all together an army and send away the Barbarians, after that they continue their internal wars. Alexander the Great wanted to lead a campaign to Asia against Persians, however the rest states doubt if he can lead that due his very young age. For this reason he had to proof his self against the opposite alliance and did it. Note that areas such Epirus or Sparta was not set foot because they came from same alliance. After he prove his self to the opposite alliance he recruit army, which not include Spartans as respect of their legend in their epis battles of Thermopulai against Persians. The main reason of Alexander the Great of his campaign to Asia, was to take revenge for all Greeks about the wars of the previous centuries and of course as dreamed a free world. Greeks are all those which came from same nation and share same language, gods, tradition and civilization. A state or kingdom does not make the nation. Nation is people of same origin, and doesn't matter if they have one or more states. Example is the Albanians, are spread in Albania, Kosovo and FYROM, they have two states, they mainly are spread to another one, but they are from one nation. About the Vergina Sun, the sun of Vergina has been found to various Greek locations and is a symbol that represents the Olympian Gods mainly, the four elements etc. Actually is a Greek symbol and have found centuries prior Alexander's era in various locations within the Ancient Greece regions cities/states. About the language, Makedonia, Alexandros and Filippos has a meaning in Greek language. What it means in Skopski language? In Skopski language all those words has no meaning and is some plain words. And if all is different with Macedonia and Greece, how can those words has meaning in Greek language but not in Skopski language? What about the Skopski names and traditions, language? How can be related with Macedonia? And if you tell me that all change from time to time. Still how can be everything completly change? And if we speak about the Slav-Macedonian. Slavs came after 6th AD in the region of Balkans, they came 1000 years after Alexander's the Great death. Bible reffers also to the Macedonia. There are more problem to consider about the new State of Macedonija, the 35% of the total population are Ethnic Albanians which Skopski republic want to name them "macedonians" by force. Is important to know that all those Albanians who makes the 35% of the total population of FYROM, they didn't migrate there recently, but this place was their natural home before even the slavs came to the region. We mention about the city of Skopje for it's original name etc. earlier. Also there are more minorities groups in FYROM who are not refer to their selfs as "macedonians" Another issue is the Shopluk area and the Bulgarian population. More notes, into the FYROM parliament there are two official languages, Albanian and Skopski, anyone can speak whatever want, also Bulgaria issue passports to Skopski people because it decides that Skopski people are Bulgarians, passport issued to them just by fill up one form in the Bulgarian embassy. Is very known that FYROM people can understand better the Bulgarian subtitles than the Serbian one. Other remarks, the VMRO never claimed the Greek name of Macedonia or Alexander the Great, but they claim territory as due the centuries they lived and spread to that territories as outcome of the wars between Greeks and Bulgarians and they call the region Macedonia, as they learned from Greeks when they appear in Balkans in the 6th century. Today Bulgarians has no intentions to the historic Macedonia, but they have to Vardarska region (FYROM) which Shopluk located and many Bulgarians live. After VMRO failed to accomplish it claims, Yugoslavia turn that propaganda into it's own favour by renain the regions to sosialistic internal republics with extension views against Bulgarians, Greeks and Albanians. This change happened due the communist changes, as same happened to Communist Russia at that time. After the second world war, a civil war comes in Greece between the communists and democratics. Communist take their supplies from Yugoslavia which aims to expend to Macedonia by using the communism as an excuse. Yugoslavians of the Vardarska commited genocide against Greeks and they mess into internal matters. Prior that it had followed the plan of Yugoslavias extension to Bulgaria, Greece and Albania, and for this reason happened the renames of the regions to socialistic republics, to fullfill that plans and to create claims from nowhere. However and this propaganda failed. After the break up of the Yugoslavia, the Republic of Macedonija (FYROM) born. The only way to survive while is landlocked, is to take from others and to invent history if wants to survive. The first part, of adopt Bulgarian language and tradition it was already there as also the name, as given to the communist era. Now that communism in Yugoslavia collapse and the break, the area was landlocked and with no major population. However the first President of Republic of Macedonija (FYROM), make it clear that they are Slavs and they have no connection with Alexander the Great and his Macedonia (check videos). We can continue very much more further. Mention also that in the Ottoman Empire, even in 18th century was newpapers in Greek language, with names "Pharos" and "Makedonia" ... based in Thessaloniki.

COMPOSE OF A NEUTRAL MAP

Now let's back to wiki, a neutral map must not lay only to one side, but to show all sides. A neutral map must write in english or local language the name of the area according to what each state call the area. Then the map must write the names of the countries as it's nation wall it self and as others call the other nations. This will represent all sides and names in one and is very enough fair. Also the boundaries of Macedonia must be dotted, and within the dots and rest area to mention the name of the country, inside dots must be written all countries related to Macedonia region. Colors must be the main national colors, blue, red and green. Map must present also the ancient Macedonian kingdom and it's capital cities. Also additional can be a light line of the expand of Macedonia during Alexander's the Great time but remember that was a time of few years only according to the whole Macedonia's Kingdom period. This will be a very neutral map which will respect everyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ГоранМирчевски (talk • contribs) 23:37, 23 December 2011 (UTC)