Talk:Boatmen of Thessaloníki
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Bulgarian sources and bias
The neutrality of this article is very poor. The attribute Bulgarian is subtly attached to anarchist group over several edits where the source is blog that discusses "Bulgarian Macedo-Adrianopolitan Revolutionary Terrorism". IMRO stands for Internal Macedonian (Adrianopolitan) Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) and has no Bulgarian adjective. It has a reason why it has no Bulgarian adjective and that is because it is Macedonian. Please refer to neutral sources to support your claims (Toci (talk) 21:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)).
- Zielonka, Jan; Pravda, Alex (2001). Democratic consolidation in Eastern Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 422. ISBN 978-0-19-924409-6. Unlike the Slovene and Croatian identities, which existed independently for a long period before the emergence of SFRY Macedonian identity and language were themselves a product federal Yugoslavia, and took shape only after 1944. Again unlike Slovenia and Croatia, the very existence of a separate Macedonian identity was questioned—albeit to a different degree—by both the governments and the public of all the neighboring nations.
- Region, Regional Identity and Regionalism in Southeastern Europe, Ethnologia Balkanica Series, Klaus Roth, Ulf Brunnbauer, LIT Verlag Münster, 2010, ISBN 3825813878, p. 127. During the 20th century, Slavo Macedonian national feeling has shifted. At the beginning of the 20th century, Slavic patriots in Macedonia felt a strong attachment to Macedonia as a multi-ethnic homeland. They imagined a Macedonian community uniting themselves with non-Slavic Macedonians... Most of these Macedonian Slavs also saw themselves as Bulgarians. By the middle of the 20th. century, however Macedonian patriots began to see Macedonian and Bulgarian loyalties as mutually exclusive. Regional Macedonian nationalism had become ethnic Macedonian nationalism... This transformation shows that the content of collective loyalties can shift.
- Nationalism and Territory: Constructing Group Identity in Southeastern Europe, Geographical perspectives on the human past : Europe: Current Events, George W. White, Rowman & Littlefield, 2000, ISBN 0847698092, p. 236. Up until the early 20th century and beyond, the international community viewed Macedonians as regional variety of Bulgarians, i.e. Western Bulgarians.
- "The struggle for Greece, 1941-1949, Christopher Montague Woodhouse, C. Hurst & Co. Publishers, 2002, ISBN 1-85065-492-1, p. 67. Most of the Slavophone inhabitants in all parts of divided Macedonia, perhaps a million and a half in all – had a Bulgarian national consciousness at the beginning of the Occupation; and most Bulgarians, whether they supported the Communists, VMRO, or the collaborating government, assumed that all Macedonia would fall to Bulgaria after the WWII. Tito was determined that this should not happen.
- The Macedonian conflict: ethnic nationalism in a transnational world, Loring M. Danforth, Princeton University Press, 1997, ISBN 0-691-04356-6, pp. 65-66. At the end of the WWI there were very few historians or ethnographers, who claimed that a separate Macedonian nation existed... Of those Slavs who had developed some sense of national identity, the majority probably considered themselves to be Bulgarians, although they were aware of differences between themselves and the inhabitants of Bulgaria... The question as of whether a Macedonian nation actually existed in the 1940s when a Communist Yugoslavia decided to recognize one is difficult to answer. Some observers argue that even at this time it was doubtful whether the Slavs from Macedonia considered themselves to be a nationality separate from the Bulgarians.
- Kaufman, Stuart J. (2001). Modern hatreds: the symbolic politics of ethnic war. New York: Cornell University Press. p. 193. ISBN 0-8014-8736-6. The key fact about Macedonian nationalism is that it is new: in the early twentieth century, Macedonian villagers defined their identity religiously—they were either "Bulgarian," "Serbian," or "Greek" depending on the affiliation of the village priest. While Bulgarian was most common affiliation then, mistreatment by occupying Bulgarian troops during WWII cured most Macedonians from their pro-Bulgarian sympathies, leaving them embracing the new Macedonian identity promoted by the Tito regime after the war. Jingiby (talk) 10:13, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
- This is general literature. Can you find me an international book about the assasins that shows that they are, or declared themselves as Bulgarians? I will not go in a general debate about how the Macedonians felt 100 years ago. That you can induce from the context of their struggle (Macedonian Organization, Macedonian commiteee, Macedonia for Macedonians, there was no slogan Macedonia for Bulgarians). Until you do not supply specific and international reference (not one that says that "all Macedonian villagers defined their identity either as 'Bulgarian,' 'Serbian,' or Greek'" the neutrality tag will stay. Please do not revert the tag. This article shows Bulgarian POV and it clashes for example with the Macedonian Wikipedia page (Toci (talk) 11:47, 10 November 2013 (UTC)).
- All included in this article. References, sources, primary, secondary, in Bulgarian language, in English, in Greek etc. Check them one by one if you wаnt. Bellow are also two Macedonian sources:
- Академик Иван Катарџиев, "Верувам во националниот имунитет на македонецот", интервjу, "Форум": "форум – Дали навистина Делчев се изјаснувал како Бугарин и зошто? Катарџиев – Ваквите прашања стојат. Сите наши луѓе се именувале како „Бугари“..."; also (in Macedonian; in English: "Academician Ivan Katardzhiev. I believe in Macedonian national immunity", July 22, 2000,issue 329, "Forum" magazine, interview: "Forum – Whether Gotse Delchev really identified himself as Bulgarian and why? Katardzhiev – Such questions exist. All our people named themselves as "Bulgarians"...")
- "Уште робуваме на старите поделби", Разговор со д-р Зоран Тодоровски, (in Macedonian; in English: "We are still in servitude to the old divisions", interview with PhD Zoran Todorovski, published on , 27. 06. 2005. Трибуна: Дел од јавноста и некои Ваши колеги историчари Ве обвинуваат дека промовирате зборник за човек (Тодор Александров) кој се чувствувал како Бугарин. Кој наш револуционерен деец од ВМРО му противречел на Александров по тоа прашање? Тодоровски - Речиси никој. Уште робуваме на поделбата на леви и десни. Во етничка, во национална смисла сите биле со исти сознанија, со иста свест. In English: Tribune: Part of the public and some from your fellow historians accuse you for promotining a collection for man (Todor Alexandrov) who felt himself as Bulgarian. Are there some of our IMRO revolutionary activist who opposed him on that issue? Todorovski - Almost none. We are still in servitude to the old divisions of left and right. Ethnically, in a national sense, they all were with the same sentiments, with the same (Bulgarian) consciousness. Jingiby (talk) 12:08, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
- Plaese. When you find an internationally published article in prominent historical scientific journal or book saying that the Gjemidzii group were declared as Bulgarians I will agree to cancel the neutrality tag. Please do not remove it by refering to general sources and infering. Wikipedia is not a place of inferences and POV (if there is such there is a tag that I have added).
- Please do not refer to daily magazines or researchers in Republic of Macedonia or Bulgaria (they all serve someones interests in making daily or weekly spectacles). Keep it on the topic too. If it is about Gjemidzii group comment. If not, please do not write general comments about who was thinking what. That is their POV and personal POV should be out of Wikipedia.
- The English Wikipedia must refer to English or scientific sources. If there are no sources the article should be neutral. Not mentioning what they were, but what they did. They were part of an anarchist group not Bulgarian anarchist group. If you remove Bulgarian as adjective and write what they did, I will remove the neutrality tag. It is so simple. They do not need to be Macedonian or Bulgarian anarchist group. Only anarchist group works. (Toci (talk) 14:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC))
- The A to Z of the Ottoman Empire, Selcuk Aksin Somel, Scarecrow Press, 2010, ISBN 1461731763, p. ixx. 1903 29 April: Bulgarian terrorists blow up the Ottoman Bank .
- A History of the Ottoman Bank, Edhem Eldem, ISBN 975333110X, Ottoman Bank Historical Research Center, 1999,pp. 239; 433. In April, 1903, the Salonika branch of the bank was bombed and burnt down by Bulgarian terrorists...
- The Imperial Ottoman Bank in Salonica: the first 25 years, 1864-1890, John Karatzoglou, Ottoman Bank Archives & Research Centre, 2003, ISBN 9759369257, p. 9.: As known, the building was blown up by Bulgarian "terrorists" forty years later, on the 29 April 1903.
- Frontiers and identities: cities in regions and nations, PLUS-Pisa University Press, 2008, Luďa Klusáková; ISBN: 978-88-8492-556-5, p. 174 The Bulgarian revolutionary campaign reached its peak in April 1903 when Bulgarian anarchists blew up the French steamship Guadalquivir and planted a bomb in the Ottoman Bank.
- The Boatmen of Thessaloniki, The Bulgarian Anarchist Group and their Bombing Activities in 1903, Giannis Megas, Trochalia, 1994, ISBN-13 978-960-7022-47-9.Jingiby (talk) 16:57, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
At first the anarchists started to make plans for bomb attack in Istanbul. In the summer of 1899, under the leadership of Slavi Merdjanov the group planned the assassination of the Sultan.?? The Amarchist organizations can't have a leader... There is something wrong here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 17:20, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Ummm, sorry m-r Arachinovo, but you must've missed the organization bit. Organizations have their leaders since they are organized. On theory Communists shouldn't have a leader as well ;) --Laveol T 17:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
The origis of the group was in Plovdiv, Eastern Rumelia, then its ideology was developed further in Geneve, Swiss and back in Plovdiv. Its founders were Bulgarian Students: Michail Gerdzhikov, Slavi Merdzhanov, Petar Sokolov and Petar Mandzhukov. Neither Russians, nor Armenians or ethnic Macedonians. Its terrorist set was stationed in Plovdiv, Istanbul, Adrianople and Salonica. Jingiby (talk) 06:57, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
"bulgarian" high school in thessaloniki
the so-called bulgarian high-school link in the article...leads to a potentially bias wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_Men%27s_High_School_of_Thessaloniki where all the sources cited are bulgarian. in absence of neutral sources,it is best to call the high-school by its real name. "Ss. Cyril and Methodius". just because a bulgarian reverts the correct name of the school to the bulgarian-bias wikipedia "bulgarian high-school" does not mean that he will change history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goce.chekorov (talk • contribs) 19:24, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
- Acording to an external link added to this article, which consists from materials from the Archives from the Salonica Branch of Ottoman Bank, in April 1903 the Bulgarian comitadjis whose aim was to arouse the attention and the intervention of European opinion, multiplied their attacks. The development of these events led to the realisation of this aim and the Ottoman powers were obliged to accept certain reforms under pressure from the Great Powers. The explosion on 15 April aboard the Guadalquivir, a French vessel anchored in the port of Salonica, is only an episode in the incidents which followed. Half an hour later, the railway station was blown up. In the evening of 29 April, the main gas pipe was destroyed and the entire city was immediately plunged into darkness. Keep in mind that in April 1903 neither Macedonian nation, nor Macedonian language existed. Check the added into the articl sources and stop nonsenses. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 19:27, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
- The school is mentioned by the name used in its Wikipedia article. The full name ("Sts. Cyril and Methodius Bulgarian Men's High School of Thessaloniki") is mentioned there. Nothing wrong with that. There's no reason to assume it's a "potentially biased" article either. And before you start accusing me of Bulgarian-bias too, I don't give a toss about Bulgaria or Macedonia, I care about the quality of the articles on WP. If anybody here appears to be biased, it's you. Please find proper sources for your changes before you make them again. Also, your edits were breaking wiki links, please be a little more careful. Thanks, Yintan 20:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
here are the sources from the article regarding the school References[edit source | editbeta]
Vanchev, Yordan (1970). Plamakat na Solunskia Svetilnik (in Bulgarian). Sofia: Narodna Prosveta. Shatev, Pavel (1934). Sbornik "Solun" (in Bulgarian). Sofia. Bozhinov, Voin (1982). Българската просвета в Македония и Одринска Тракия 1878-1913 (Bulgarian Education in Macedonia and Adrianopole Thrace 1878-1913) (in Bulgarian). Sophia: Izd-vo na Bŭlgarskata akademii︠a︡ na naukite. p. 73. Demetriades, Vasiles (1983). Topographia tēs Thessalonikēs kata tēn epochē tēs Tourkokratias, 1430-1912 (Topography of Thessaloniki in the Age of the Turkokratia). Makedonikē Bibliothēkē (in Greek) 61. Thessaloniki: Hetaireia Makedonikōn Spoudōn. p. 401.
all bulgarian and one greek,which could be fake for all we know. just a question...If I make a wikipedia article and call this school "greek high-school Ss.Cyril and methoduis" and quote 3 greek sources... does that make me right? what the school then? greek or bulgarian? all I am saying is the way the Ss. Cyirl and Methodius school is called bulgarian is wrong. the name of the school is Sc. Cyril and Methoduis. only in the first occurence is called something like that, after that it is called simply "Bulgarian" which is incorrect. Goce.chekorov (talk) 20:22, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
- There is no reason to assume (as you do) that these sources are biased or fake simply because they are Bulgarian. If you can indeed find verifiable, third party sources that say the school has a different name, or is Greek, then it's another story but for now there's nothing to support your claims. WP wants sources. See als WP:NOTTRUTH. One quick quote from there: "Editors may not add their own views to articles simply because they believe them to be correct, and may not remove sources' views from articles simply because they disagree with them." Thanks, Yintan 20:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)