Talk:National awakening of the ethnic Macedonians

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Title

Why Sir, the title of this article is atrocious! The very name Macedonia is ambiguous! - Francis Tyers · 18:23, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I say, you're right! However, there is only one "national awakening" (that is start of ethnic nationalism) of any group with the name "Macedonian"/"Macedonia", so I think we're safe! I've included two disambiguation notes to make it completely clear! - Francis Tyers · 18:24, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, that sounds fairly reasonable, after all the Macedonians haven't had a national awakening, they are Greek, and their Macedonia is Greece. There can be only one thing referred to with "National awakening of Macedonia", and with those disambiguation notes, I must say it is quite unambiguous. - Francis Tyers · 18:26, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bullshit

...we don't want to monopolize the name "Macedonia" so the Greek position is unreasonable...

This is repeated again and again by FYROM nationalists and their apologists (such as Francis), but that it is articles such as this which demonstrate that that position is a pile of crap. //Dirak 18:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Please point out another National awakening of Macedonia and I will gladly disambiguate the name. As it stands the name is unambiguous as there has only been one Macedonian national awakening, and that is of the ethnic Macedonians. Please, I'd like to see another one, then we have some ambiguity. - Francis Tyers · 18:35, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Word games... this implies that there are grades of macedonianness with FYROM at the top and everyone else at the bottom. Macedonia is not the national homeland of only the Macedonians (FYROM variety), and everyone else are foreigners. Need I remind you that the Macedonians (FYROM variety) are a minority in the region. //Dirak 18:41, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree they are a minority. You've mentioned that thing about "grades" before. It didn't make sense then and it doesn't make sense now. - Francis Tyers · 18:43, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Why do they get to monopolize the name? You know it is controversial, you know that it is a territorial claim (if the national awakening of Macedonia only pertains to the FYRO Macedonians, then that looks like a territorial claim to me). //Dirak 18:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't see how it is a territorial claim. Macedonia can mean a million (well not quite) different things, and it only means "unliberated Macedonian homeland" in a minority of crazed extremist nationalists. This article does not support their point of view. - Francis Tyers · 18:52, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
No, it means a region in southeastern Europe. When you link that region to the national awakening of one ethnic group it is a territorial claim. //Dirak 18:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Did you even bother to read the disambiguation note? - Francis Tyers · 19:41, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Dirak, Fran says that MacedoniansFYROMvariety are superior to MacedoniansProperGreek because they have a state of their own (disregarding the fact that it is a number issue, i.e. FYROMvariety shares that country with another 34% of the population, while ProperGreek does so with another 75% rest of Greeks). NikoSilver 18:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I also like the fact that you marginalize those. I am curious, didn't you spot it in your visit there? Most I've met think that they descend from Ancient Macedonians and that Aegean Macedonia is occupied territory. There are also official sources for all that (to remind you). NikoSilver 18:58, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
All of the people I met on my visit agree that Alexander was more Greek than ethnic Macedonian, and none of them layed claim on him, or believed that they were descended from him. You obviously swing in the wrong circles, Niko :D - Francis Tyers · 19:02, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Finally, national awakening in Macedonia could regard other ethnic groups living in the region. Several incidents taking place in Macedonia constitute national awakening for Greeks, Serbs, Bulgarians etc. I'm changing the name (Jesus, I'll actually have to type this). NikoSilver 19:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I'll dab that. - Francis Tyers · 19:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
They already have their own articles, so I've added them to the dab note. PS. Thanks for using "Republic of Macedonia" I know it will have been hard :/ - Francis Tyers · 19:07, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I do huh? I've been there 15 times (or so). I've spoken with doxens of people. Regretfully, the wrong circles comprise the majority of the population. Finally, I remind you official sources (which you dodged). So, the point is: can you provide sources for your claims that they don't? I can provide sources that they do. Finally, do you really want me to cite facts that constitute national awakening for Serbs, Greeks, Bulgarians etc in Macedonia (region)?? What exactly do we dispute here? (PS. I didn't use RoM. M was pretyped and I only typed Ro and hit enter! :-)) NikoSilver 19:11, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
You can't prove a negative, and I wouldn't trust the official sources. The amount of rubbish the official sources of the UK government puts out is astonishing. About the RoM, phew! :)) - Francis Tyers · 19:36, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I redirected this article to what it is supposed to mean in whichever way you put it. You can delete that other with the RoM thing and move it there. NikoSilver 19:17, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Please say if you think that after reading the disambiguation note if the article has any ambiguity as to what it refers to. The dab note mentions all the other national awakenings to do with Macedonia, points out that it is definitely not about Macedonia, and specifically describes it as relating to the present day ethnic Macedonians. - Francis Tyers · 19:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes Fran, but it is not enough. The same way, the article for the country and for the ethnic group have dab notes, but also include dab in the title ("Republic of" and "ethnic group" respectively). Your new title is fine though. NikoSilver 20:22, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I am really dissappointed... NikoSilver 20:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I did say that the new title was reasonable, but the comment seems to have disappeared in the to-ing and fro-ing. - Francis Tyers · 20:31, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Danforth

You added 5 or so different refs for the same book. Are you going to add pages? If yes, I suggest you compile them into one ref, and add pages for a,b,c refs. (like we did in for Wilkinson). NikoSilver 20:25, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Did they fix the bug yet? - Francis Tyers · 20:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Old-ref style. How about doing it like we did it like in the Notes in Mac Term? (using above {{Ref label|Danforth|1|a}} and below {{note label|Danforth|1|a}})? I suggest you do it now, before we increase the number of refs. NikoSilver 20:39, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Ok, let me look at that. - Francis Tyers · 20:48, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This is an tiny essay: remove

This is not an encyclopedia article, but more of a little essay that does not make the grade. The elements which are fact can be moved to a relevant article. Usual pattern: a few words borrowed from other articles and a bit of speculation (and waiting for someone else to write the homework :?) User:Politis

You're right, its half as long as comparable articles. - Francis Tyers · 10:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, unlike 'National awakening of Romania', this is a half baked school essay, not an entry for wikipedia. Administrators should remind user to take their essays where they belong, not on wikipedia. Politis 12:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

And unlike 'National awakening of Romania' every statement is referenced. :) Politis, I'm flattered that you offer constructive criticism of my work and would appreciate more ;) - Francis Tyers · 12:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

What is the fuction of :) and :) in your text? I will move to move any relevant information to the appropriate entry and delete the contents of this page adding a link. Politis 13:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The strange looking combinations of symbols are emoticons; ":)" is a smile, and ";)" is a winking smile. Some people on the internet like to use emoticons to communicate facial expressions which are otherwise difficult to represent in a purely text-mode environment. Regarding the article, I would hope that you wouldn't attempt to get it deleted as it is a valid topic, and there are comparable articles on other Balkan national awakenings. - Francis Tyers · 13:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Just to avoid misunderstanding about unacceptable behaviour and inapproptiate language disguised as emoticons, Why is a 'wink' needed in your text when adressing an editor? As for deleting. Yes, there are other articles, they are not essays. What you have done is impose an semblance of an essay (trying to work out personal issues and getting wiki editors to provide you with material?). Essays and POV material are deleted and should not be attempted. Of course, the usefull information will be removed to an appropriate article. Politis 13:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I understand that your position is that there is no "National awakening of the ethnic Macedonians", that it was an "invention of Tito" (what Danforth describes as the Greek nationalist position), but this is not the perspective of the ethnic Macedonians, nor is it the perspective of many Western scholars, who treat the Macedonian national awakening much the same as any other Balkan nationalism, albeit started and finished later. The appropriate article is this one, as it deals with the subject matter. Regarding the emoticons, I like to express myself online, if that makes you feel uncomfortable, then I will by all means stop it when dealing with yourself. You have but to say the word. - Francis Tyers · 13:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Are you OK? I think you read to much 'between the lines' rather than read the text. Seriously, and in friendly feelings, do you ever feel that you fail to register or absorb that which you read? Try this quick test of your observation abilities: where did you ever get the idea that my position is that 'there is no national awakening of the ethnic Macedonians'? That is either a daft accusation of an inability to grasp a subject (as well as a partial if not biased understanding of the 'Greek position').
I repeat what I said: this is not a wikipedia article but an inadequate essay. It does not make the grade.
If you want to keep it, re-write it! Yes, it is a good topic. But do your research, do some work and show some ability. And then I will correct it where relevant to the best of my skills. Politis 23:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
We can all LOL together -- suppressing smile -- I'm glad you think that it is a good topic! To be honest I agree that it is currently inadequate, but I do intend to fix it and appreciate your increasingly constructive approach. I'm going to Spain in a couple of days for a couple of weeks, so won't be able to do much before the 12th January. I actually have a related topic that I'm researching at the moment, we discussed it before (User:Francis Tyers/Research), so hopefully some of the stuff from that might be applicable. - Francis Tyers · 11:01, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Evidence that A = B please

Regarding this could the quote where Danforth purportedly says that the national awakening took place then be cited.--Domitius 20:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

PS talk of a "Macedonian nation" began long before the time the article states. It was (rather unsuprisingly) in a Serbian schoolbook.--Domitius 20:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

C'mon man, how hard is it to copy and past the relevant paragraph?--Domitius 21:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

"The history of the construction of a Macedonian national identity does not begin with Alexander the Great in the fourth century B.C. or with Saints Cyril and Methodius in the ninth century A.D. as Macedonian nationalist historians often claim. Nor does it begin with Tito and the establishment of the People's Republic of Macedonia in 1944 as Greek nationalist historians would have us believe. It begins in the ninenteeth century with the first expressions of Maceodnian ethnic nationalism on the partof a small number of intellectuals in places like Thessaloniki, Belgrade, Sophia and St. Petersburg. This period marks the beginning of the process of "imagining" a Macedonian national community, the beginning of the construction of a Macedonian national identity and culture" (Danforth 1995 : 56)
Sorry for the wait... - Francis Tyers · 22:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
No problem. I don't want to seem to pedantic, but he doesn't mention, a national awakening. Can't we reword the lead to say something like "The history of the construction of a Macedonian Slav national identity begins in the ninenteeth century...". It helps avoid tags.--Domitius 23:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
It means the same thing, but do as you wish. Of course I'm sure all the other articles have "national awakening", and I'm sure he'd say they were constructed too. - Francis Tyers · 05:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mergers and moves

  • Whilst the article should not be merged with History of the Balkans, what about a merger with Macedonism?
  • I suggest moving the article from its present name. If this is about Macedonian nationalism, the article title should clarify that.

--Soman 15:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

The article is like the title says, about the National awakening of the ethnic Macedonians, this is to fit in with National awakening of Bulgaria, National awakening of Romania, National awakening and the birth of Albania etc. - Francis Tyers · 10:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Attacks on this article

This article looks fine the way it is named and the way it is placed among other similar national awakening articles. It can probably be expanded into a much better article, but that is absolutely no reason for its removal. If we start removing all articles that could have been better written from wikipedia, soon we will have a very small free encyclopedia. It can stay this way until some good soul puts some time into it ;) <-- emoticon .

As for the merging with History of the Balkans, it might be a possibility only after all the other national awakening articles are merged into it.

Capricornis 00:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV?

I am very interested to see where is the POV here? This is probably the most sourced article I've ever seen, every sentence having a citation? Capricornis 00:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed to be readded

Needs to be readded with proper referencing:


After the Christian population of the bishoprics of Skopje and Ohrid voted in 1874 overwhelmingly in favour of joining the Exarchate (Skopje by 91%, Ohrid by 97%), the Bulgarian Exarchate became in control of the whole of Vardar and Pirin Macedonia. The Exarchate was also represented in the whole of southern Macedonia. The “Macedonian Question,” became especially prominent after the Balkan wars in 1912-1913 and the subsequent division of Macedonia between the three neighboring states, followed by tensions between them over possession of Macedonia. This partitioning of the territory had a tremendous influence on the development of the Macedonian national identity.[1] In order to legitimise their claims, each of these countries tried to 'persuade' the population into allegiance.[2] Some scientists argue also that the use of any ethnic definition of the Slav speekers in Macedonia during the 19th and early 20th Century did not refer to ethnicity, but rather a socio-occupational description. The Slav population in Macedonia tended to be Christian peasents, farming folk,[3] attested socio-political circumstances, such as in what language the local schooling was provided, or whether the local church aligned itself with Serbian, Bulgarian or Greek Orthodoxy. The majority were under the influence of the Bulgarian Exarchate and its education system, thus in the early 20th century and beyond, were regarded as Bulgarians, whatever that meant.(Brubaker 1996: 153; Ruhl 1916: 6; Perry in Lorrabee 1994: 61)[4][5][6] However, the key events in the formation of a distinctive Macedonian identity emerged during the first half of the 20th century in the aftermath of the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913 when the Bulgarian Exarchate discontinued its activity in most of the region. The process strengthed especially following the Second World War, with the withdrawal of Bulgarian authorities from Macedonia, the establishment of Yugoslav Macedonian Republic and the signing of Bled agreement. With the founding of the People's Republic of Macedonia in 1944 as part of SFRY, a sense of a Macedonian national identity gained strength and became systematised.(Bell 1998:193) The Yugoslav government began a policy of removing any Bulgarian influence and cementing the Macedonian identity.[7]


- Francis Tyers · 12:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)