Talk:Macedonian/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Diaspora question

While for the Macedonians (ethnic group) in the diaspora, as for any other officially evidenced and recognized ethnic minority, we have official state census numbers eg. Australia 83,978 - 200,000, United States 51,733 - 200,000 etc, Canada 37,055 - 150,000 etc for the Greek Macedonians we have nothing such. All we have for the Greek Macedonians is the Regional identity section and the number of the inhabitants of the region, in the article about the Greek region Macedonia. Since the Regional Macedonian identity of this citizens is granted only by their residence in the region hence Regional Identity its absurd to talk about "diaspora regional identity". We need some verified official documents in order to keep information about this kind of "diaspora regional identity" on the page, thank you.Alex Makedon (talk) 11:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Whom, then, do the Pan-Macedonian associations of the world represent? The Martian diaspora? ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 12:10, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Plus, I have answered that in the previous section, with references. Refer to it otherwise stop your tendentious (and tedious) disruptive editing. --157.228.x.x (talk) 12:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

To 157.228.x.x you wrote: Many of these migrants and their descendants still carry this ethnic and regional identity. Ethnic Identity is one thing, regional identity is another. Since the text you presented its about Ethnic Identity i presume you refer to the Macedonians (ethnic group) diaspora, since there is no "Regional Macedonian Greek ethnic" identity. If its about Greek Regional Identity, as i sad before we need some verified official documents in order to keep the information on the page.Alex Makedon (talk) 13:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I have been looking at the quoted Pan-Macedonian Hellenic USA association site [1], an NGO with an unclear status (correct me wrong), and i haven't been able to find any relevant data or official numbers on the Regional Macedonian Identity diaspora in USA (eg. members, estimated numbers or criteria). see for example the Macedonians (ethnic group) diaspora communites like theMacedonian Australian, Macedonian Canadians, Macedonian Americans, there is no such information about the "Regional Macedonian Identity of Greeks" diaspora Alex Makedon (talk) 13:41, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

He and the sources he cites very clearly and unambiguously refer to the ethnoregional Greek Macedonian identity of the diaspora. Stop disrupting the talk page. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 13:43, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Asking about official and verified information is not disrupting the talk page. I want to find out where is the information about the "Regional Macedonian Greek diaspora Identity" from? How about the new term used to describe it: ethnoregional identity, where it has been used? For example the Macedonians (ethnic group) identity is well documented both in Republic of Macedonia and abroad, this is not the case of the "Regional Macedonian Greek diaspora ethnoregional" (what is the official correct name?), and since the only information we have on the Regional Macedonian Idenitiy is this Greek Macedonians and its about the inhabitants of the Greek regions named Macedonia, i find quite confusing the information about regional diaspora.Alex Makedon (talk) 13:53, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Everyone here knows what you're trying to do and it simply won't wash. Let it go. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 13:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I have also said ethno (Greek)-regional (Macedonian) identity. Anyway, I can not assume good faith with you anymore. You are either a troll (reincarnation of many) or a clueless partisan, or both. I tend for the former since I detect gleams of insight as well as familiar “copycat” tactics. Anyway, I'm not here to educate you nor provide you with any "official" documents, what-ever-that means to you. If you truly lack knowledge on these issues, I would kindly suggest to read the amble references in the relevant articles and try to formulate a somewhat educated opinion. But just in case you think that I'm avoiding the specific question, I will provide a verbatim quote from one fo the references I've cited in the previous section, for this time and this time, only:

Although the great majority of migrants settled in the large southern capital cities, significant numbers of Macedonian Greeks settled in the Shepparton area in Victoria as well as in Renmark, South Australia.

I. H. Burnley, (1976), The Social Environment: A Population and Social Geography of Australia, University of Michigan:McGraw-Hill, ISBN 0070932158, p. 90

I’m sorry to say but with this attitude, wikipedia is not a place for you. Try a forum or something --157.228.x.x (talk) 14:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

we need official information on Greek Macedonians diaspora, look at this:

• Demographics of Australia 2006 census : Greeks 1.8%, Macedonians 0.4%
• Ethnic groups in Canada 2002 Census: Greeks 215,105, Macedonians 31,265 [2]
• US census: Greeks 1,153,295,[3] Macedonian 38,051[4]

the official goverment census data are or about Greeks or about Macedonians, so where is the Greek Macedonians diaspora, not a single goverment acknowledges this Greek Macedonians ethnoregional identity, not in a single census. In the light of this evidence its clear that someone is trying to push unverified pov information about an inexistent (or at least unofficial) ethnic group in order to create confusion (talking about trolls). I continue to assume good faith given that verifible official information about this ethnoregional diaspora identity are provided. Alex Makedon (talk) 14:38, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

No census in recorded history documented the existence of etchnic "Macedonians" before the 1940s, so what? ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 14:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Just for the sheer comedic value of it, can you my non-Greek-with-a-Greek-name friend tell me what do you want? To prove that Greek Macedonians do not exist?--Avg (talk) 23:49, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

you tell me where to fit this this "identity"

• no goverment in the world (greece included) or international organization acknoledges it ("regional identity diaspora" what?)
• not even a single greek official document to clarify the status of this identity
• there is no official document where this ID is stated
• no official data of any kind, no census no nothing
• no official criteria about having this kind of ID
• an unclear identity category (sometimes referred by users as regional, than ethnoregional or ethnic) in any case never supported or taken in consideration by any official body

(about the "greek words", how was that quote from My Big Fat Greek Wedding, the strongest "Greek" doctrine: "Give me a word, any word, and I show you that the root of that word is Greek" lol, even Vedic Sanskrit its just a version of the "Greek" right? and ofc the immutability and continuum of 2500 years of Ancient Hellens up till present time is given for granted) =) Alex Makedon (talk) 11:07, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

That's rather rich coming from a Slav (not a slur, but simply the English name for a member of a Slavic-speaking ethnic group) calling himself "Alex Makedon". ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 14:03, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

that was pretty low, are you having racial and xenophobic issues ΚΕΚΡΩΨ? I know my racial and ethnic appartenance, do you happen to know yours? do you truly believe that there is something like "Ancient Hellen" race and ethnicity perhaps? ...Ill stop here since this discussion is off topic and I dont want to lower myself to your cheap ignorant talks. Alex Makedon (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

And what is your "racial and ethnic appartenance", oh Great One? Enlighten us mere mortals. I'm glad you've finally mastered the spelling of the word ethnic, by the way. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 18:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

lol kid wikipedia is not a place for you, take your trolling to a forum or something. Alex Makedon (talk) 21:34, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

That doesn't answer the question, deca begalci. According to your bespectacled foreign minister's very own website, "The penetration of Slavic tribes towards the Balkans ended at the beginning of the seventh century and created a new situation - Macedonia's population mixed with the Slav newcomers but retained the Macedonian name, traditions and culture." Is there any evidence at all to support this outlandish claim? Which traditions? Which culture? Where is the evidence that a Slavic ethnic group used the name "Macedonians" before the twentieth century? That's what I want to know. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 03:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Violation of revert rule

I edited the article according to specifications, Future Perfect as Sunrise reverted it 3 times. Politis (talk) 11:36, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Future Perfect at Sunrise, apart from being an incorrigible edit warrior, consciously distorts the meaning of a disambiguation article. The fact that he himself has merged the article about Macedonians (Greek) to Macedonia (Greece) does not mean that someone who has typed "Macedonian" in Wikipedia may not be looking for them. Thankfully all these diffs will be presented to the arbitration.--Avg (talk) 11:43, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Avg, are you saying that it was FPatS that manipulated that link (Macedonia Greeks in Macedonia Greece article)? In other words, if someone failed to notice the 'trick', they he could slap a revert ban on them? Surely not?! Have a look if you like just for peace of mind.Politis (talk) 11:51, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean this or this? He did both anyway.--Avg (talk) 12:02, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

"Macedonians (Greek[s])" has never been a legitimate article. It was created a few times with the sole purpose of having a link to link to, never because anybody had anything actually worthwhile to say about these people. As for likely search terms: Readers who want to read about the people of Macedonia (Greece) are covered by the very first introductory sentence. If you want those readers to not have to take the detour through another dab page, then let's fucking merge the dab pages again, because if we're going to list the different "Macedonias" here too, we will again have two near-identical pages. Make up your minds, at last.

But anyway, as for the likelihood of people searching for this: I'm afraid I'll have to destroy a few misconceptions here. The term "Macedonian", in English as spoken by native English speakers, basically never means Greek Macedonians. It means either the modern Slavs (or their country), the ancient Macedonians, or the whole region. The only contexts where people use "Macedonian(s)" in the emphatically Greek sense is in polemical use, by Greeks stating their POV position in the naming dispute (like in that Karamanlis quote, which just goes to demonstrate just this: its whole rhetorical force was derived from the fact that it sounded totally outlandish in English.) I just did a few corpus searches: the Greek meaning of the word "M." is virtually non-existent in the English language. It's a phantom word constructed by some Greek wikipedians' wishful thinking. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:03, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Plain OR by Fut.Perf. Leaving third parties aside, forgot the self-determination bit? What about all the English-speaking Macedonian organizations in USA, Canada and Australia? Unless you mean that more than 1 million Macedonian Greek native English speakers should not be catered for per WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Is it a fact yes or no that English speaking organizations with thousands of members use "Macedonian" to mean explicitly Greek Macedonian?--Avg (talk) 12:09, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

How often do I have to remind you that "OR" is not an issue in talk page discussions about editorial decisions? But I know, you are immune against learning, it's no use telling you anything you don't like to hear, you'll just ignore it anyway, as always. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

No I ensure you I will not ignore it, I will save it as a diff for the arbitration.--Avg (talk) 12:15, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Insulting talk by FPatS

His edit summary for reverting were "there is no article there" and "there is not article there either". A clear reference that the link did not conect. The link was established and his edit summary stated "Are you dumb?..." Such language does not befit an administrator and is certainly not consistent with 'there is no article there' summaries.Politis (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I don't know if you are indeed just playing dumb, but it is a true fact that there is no article there. There's only a redirect to a different article, which this dab page already covers in another way, through its first sentence. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:06, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Potential Racist spin?

FPatS stated, "The term "Macedonian", in English as spoken by native English speakers, basically never means Greek Macedonians." There are over one million native English speakers of Greek heritage and other who are not and who use the term 'Macedonian' to indicate Greekness. One may agree or disagree with them but it is their right (no offence to our Macedonian/Makedonski friends). FPasS was categorical in saying never. How does he define 'native English speakers'? I suspect he is using racial criteria. Politis (talk) 12:12, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I use "native English" as that which ends up being reflected in representative linguistic corpora of actual native English speech, such as the Corpus of Contemporary American English. The Greek meaning of "M." is not only rare, it is vanishingly rare. Even rarer than a meaning as exotic as the Byzantine Macedonian dynasty. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:15, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Be very careful with what you say (and, considering the circumstances, I really mean it as a friendly wikipedia fellow traveller wanting to help). The above explanation might be for linguistic papers, not for wikipedia discourse. You are playing with ethnic concepts that I (me User Politis) would consider containing racialist overtones. We also have native English speakers who say Macedonian in the sense of ethnic Macedonians, and they are also certainly increasing in numbers. Add those to the user of the term in the 'Greek' sense and the numbers grow. Please keep out of things you cannot back or need to make convoluted excuses. As for the Macedonian dynasty, dont guess, just ask a Byzantinist, saddly there are not many around but I met a few during an exhibition on Byzantium from all over Europe and they did use the term Macedonian dynasty. Ask me for names and quotes if you like, but off list, hope I can find them. Politis (talk) 19:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Dude, I know what Byzantinists talk about. And the corpus I looked at also contains a random representation of Greek speakers/authors. It's just that they quantitatively don't make any noticeable impact on the totality of native English usage. And if I hear "racialist" from you once again, I'm gonna puke. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think for a moment that Fut. Perf. is being "racialist". Bear in mind that we are supposed to employ verifiable, reliable sources to establish usage. He's citing the Corpus of Contemporary American English, which is a definitive source of usage information in American English. The Oxford Corpus (from which the Oxford English Dictionary is written) does the same thing on an even bigger scale for all varieties of the English language. That's an objective way of measuring such things. Your argument, I'm afraid, is an entirely unsourced statement of personal opinion. We can't approach the issue on that basis - it's prohibited by the no original research policy. -- ChrisO (talk) 19:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

FPatS stated above, "The term 'Macedonian', in English as spoken by native English speakers, basically never means Greek Macedonians". Well there are millions of native English speakers who do use it in that way. So 'never' is a loaded term to make a false point. Here it acts more like a the screems and foot stamping of a child wanting to be listened to, because there are easy and accurate ways of conveying meaning.

The term 'native English speakers' is a tricky one. It looks to me that, at best, FPatS misused it and then tried to cover up (I do not consider this a breech of wiki etiquette, but it sounds dumb). If I misunderstand, please explain. Politis (talk) 14:50, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

FPaS' statement is in no way racist and continuing to try to twist it that way is unhelpful and innaccurate. 99.5% of US citizens are not of Greek ancestry. To them and many of the people of Greek ancestry, the term Macedonian refers to groups that are not Greek or that have been historically debated whether they were Greek, like the ancient Macedonians. Edward321 (talk) 01:06, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Macedonians (ethnic group) or just Macedonians

Dear fellow wikipedians, I am coming back to an old topic that was opened several months ago, and was decided to leave it open until the necessary time comes. As all of us are aware that for native English speakers the term Macedonians refers to members of the Macedonian ethnic group, I believe it is time to change the title of the article from Macedonians (ethnic group) to simply Macedonians (as it is commonly accepted in the English speaking world). The disambiguation page Macedonia will remain in order to distinguish the modern Macedonians from the inhabitants of Ancient Macedonia. Regards to all. --Revizionist (talk) 13:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Everybody go here in order to centralise the discussion. BalkanFever 04:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Macedo-Romanian(s)

Excuse me Future, what about that ISO 639 Registration Authorities', i.e. Joint Advisory Committee (JAC) has decided to include in the ISO 639 table Aromanian as follows: [5]:

English name: Aromanian; Arumanian; Macedo-Romanian;

And what about: ...I studied the question if the Aromanians (also Aroumanians, Aromunians, Cincars, Kutsovlachs, Macedoromanians) after 1990.... The Ethnicity of Aromanians after 1990: the Identity of a Minority that Behaves like a Majority,Publication: Ethnologia Balkanica (06/2002) Author Name: Kahl, Thede; Language: English Subject: Anthropology Issue: 06/2002 Page Range: 145-169 No. of Pages: 25 Jingby (talk) 11:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

"Macedo-Romanian" is not the same word as "Macedonian". This page is only for people who have typed "Macedonian", literally in that form, in the search box. Somebody who wants to learn about Macedo-Romanian will type "Macedo-Romanian". They'll never pass through here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:32, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

POV edits

IP 69.14.179.109, please, discuss before changing the descriptions on the section. Thank you. Jingby (talk) 08:16, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Sort Macedonian groups by population size?

Shouldn't the population order in the article's list for the of Macedonian groups be listed by population rather by ethnicity? I noticed that a group whom the population size compromises only 36% of the entire geographical region of Macedonia (Slav Macedonians), is listed before the group whom the population compromises 53% of the entire region of Macedonia (Greek Macedonians) and that is probably because the Slav Macedonians are identifying themselves in an ethnic level, while the Greek Macedonians in a regional level.

But since this article is not refering to country identity, but the identity of Macedonians, regardless of origin. All of those groups (Slav Macedonians, Greek Macedonians and Bulgarian Macedonians) identifying themselves as Macedonians, then why not list them by population order? --85.75.161.21 (talk) 23:27, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

You have a point... Macedonian, a Greek (talk) 23:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I moved the Macedonian Language to the "Linguistics Group" as it is a language (linguistic), not people. The people groups are sorted by population order, from biggest to smallest group, like in most Wiki articles. I cleared abit the info about the Aromanian Macedonian group so it does not has two links appointing on the same identity article (one link is fairly enough). The Ethnic/Regional sense of the word Macedonian is now in parenthesis ( ) for all the Macedonian groups, while the description text refers to classification of the group's identity. Hope the article looks less confusing and more clear now.--85.75.161.21 (talk) 23:55, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I have reverted. The relevant ordering criterion for this page is not population size, but prominence of usage in the English language, combined with reader interest as reflected in number of page hits. Fut.Perf. ☼ 01:12, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm? Hit popularity is irrelevant. This is Wikipedia, not youtube. Better sort the groups alphabetically or by size. If popularity was the measure, then we could place ancient Macedonians before every other groups, as they get more hits than any other groups. But we don't do so, as this is not logical for an encyclopedia. Revert is undone. The article is more reasonable this way. We sort the groups by their size, from majority to minority, and the Macedonian language is moved to a new group called Linguistics. (Here could also go the Bulgarian Macedonian Dialect as well). --85.75.161.21 (talk) 01:57, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

This is a disambiguation page. Its sole purpose is to aid readers to go more quickly to the articles they are seeking. So, obviously, those articles that more readers are interested in should go on top, because that way it makes navigation easier for a larger number.

Macedonians (ethnic group) and Macedonian language each have between 400 and 500 readers per day. Macedonians (Greeks) has about 60 per day, i.e. one order of magnitude less. Macedonians (Bulgarians) has less than 20. Ancient Macedonians has about 180. The relation between the ancient and the modern Slavic senses fairly accurately reflects the frequencies of usage outside Wikipedia, as reflected in corpus counts of naturally occurring English prose, as well as Google counts.

This has all been debated ad nauseam multiple times. Fut.Perf. ☼ 02:10, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

OK, Fut.Perf, your request is done: I moved Macedonians (Ethnic Group) to first place and Macedonians (Greeks) to second place. I hope you are right, because I never expected Wikipedia to list articles by popularity. Is just weird. Ridiculous. Anyone else who may confirm the listing of articles by popularity as reasonable?--85.75.161.21 (talk) 02:26, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Linguistic uses

In my opinion the "Ancient Macedonian language", must be added to "Linguistic uses" ( a lot of books are referring to the "Macedonian dialect" which was spoken in Ancient Macedonia).E.g:the language which was spoken in Ancient Macedonia. There is no need for an extra explanation (if it was or not related with the Ancient Greek language). Otherwise the article cannot be considered neutral.jest 12:46, 25 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jestmoon (talk • contribs)

Hmm. It's currently under "historical uses", together with the Ancient Macedonians article whose linguistic counterpart it is. Up until recently, the modern Macedonian language was similarly placed directly underneath its corresponding "ethnic" article Macedonians (ethnic group). The inconsistency you point out was created because some months ago, somebody split up the initial, general-use section into two explicit sections about "population" and "linguistic", with only a single entry in the second. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:54, 25 April 2013 (UTC)