Talk:Cyril and Methodius

MK Wikipedia

Can someone deal with the issue in MK Wikipedia? http://mk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B2._%D0%9A%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BB_%D0%B8_%D0%9C%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%98

Their own references talk about "Byzantine Greeks" and they keep deleting the part about "Greeks". This is absurd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.84.25.228 (talk) 09:31, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I am afraid the editors in MK Wikipedia are very biased politically, and unfortunately, any corrections may go to vain. I think they are strongly motivated by the FYROM's Macedonia Name Dispute with Greece. Now they even call Cyril and Methodius as... Ethnic Macedonians. Its ridiculous. Really, the Wikipedia Creator, Jimmy Wales and his group need pay some attention and deal with the issues regarding the MK Wiki. The Wikipedia is not a place for propaganda or personal political goals. --85.75.189.243 (talk) 05:58, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm of the opinion there are Greek government trolls policing and editing Wikipedia for there own political bias towards Macedonia, Macedonian historical copyrights and the Macedonian Empire etc. E.g Alexander was Greek!!

The missionaries were Byzantines (Romans in fact). That’s all. About 400 years after their time, in the 13th century, after the Crusades, the Europeans started calling the Romans from the Eastern Roman Empire - Greeks (pejoratively). In the 9th century they could have been just Romans, therefore we cannot call the brothers "Byzantine Greeks". Similarly we cannot call them "Byzantine Macedonians" either, although they were from the territory of the (ancient, later roman province, i.e. Byzantine province of) Macedonia. Indeed, they might have been Slave Macedonians, since they could translate the sacred texts INTO slave language, what would have been impossible if they were not borne Slave. Indeed, the translations use declinations that the Slave Macedonians probably did not have. However, Check and Slovak languages had declinations and it was possible that their students, number of whom were Checks or Slovaks, corrected their translations. Therefore the most correct would be to call the brothers just Byzantines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.65.113.42 (talk) 20:46, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

We've been through this before; if you have a look in Talk:Saints Cyril and Methodius/Archive 6 you will see. The sources say the men were both Greek. -- Dianna (talk) 01:23, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I looked it up right now. Very interesting discussion. The sources (Britanica usw.) say they were just Byzantianes (Roman) and may be Slave. Greeks did not exist before 12-13 century. The Helenes existed, but they were more in the South. In the North of the today's Greece was Macedonia. No Basileus was a "Basileus of the Greeks" but of the "Romans" (Romanoi?). There are thousends of documents that show this. Where is the problem then? 85.75.189.243. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.53.139.78 (talk) 10:29, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

If you look a little closer, the sources say they were Greek. I looked at all the sources and confirmed them personally. -- Dianna (talk) 14:04, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Dianna are you from Greek Macedonia? If C&M were true "Greeks" then they would have promoted the Greek language to the Slavs and NOT Cyrilic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.6.164.67 (talk) 14:43, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

In the cited archives I found only empty boasting against well documented evidence that the brothers were simply Byzantines, no more and no less. Is this some Greek propaganda site again? Hmmm.. You "confirmed them personally"?? You confirmed something by merely looking? Or your grammar is deceiving you. You mean you verified? You must be Greek. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.65.113.42 (talk) 15:53, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Why does it say they were born in Thessaloniki???? The town was called "Salon" for hundreds of years before it was ceded to Greece about 100 years ago and the name Hellenicised. Is it totally incorrect to say Born: Macedonia or Macedonian Region? Is there a department of the Greek government constantly checking Wikipedia and deleting all references to Macedonia as totally independent from Greece for Hundreds of years??? Wonder what the Greek kids text books say?? Anyway, this Wiki introduction kind of implies C&M were Greek when they weren't. Sure they may of spoken Greek but it doesnt mean they are, like saying Latin speakers are not necessarily all from Roma. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.6.164.67 (talk) 14:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Before parading your ignorance for the world to see, you might like to check on the history of Thessaloniki and its name. Just saying... Constantine ✍ 14:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Wow, why does it not surprise me that there are FYROM nationalists at work here? :) The funny thing is not that they challenge common historical understanding with their outlandish claims, but that they choose to pick on one of the best studied and documented histories of all: the Greek one. It's such a pointless exercise. Nevertheless, if they can present a good reference for their claims, by all means the Wikipedia community will take a look. But to keep littering articles on Greek history with repetitions of the same tired old claims that have already been explained away... well, that's just silly.76.10.147.236 (talk) 20:18, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 22 April 2012

remove: The assumed seat of Methodius as archbishop was in Nitra.

Iustusest (talk) 14:19, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

 Not done: please give reasoning. --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 22:12, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

reference for The assumed seat of Methodius as archbishop was in Nitra in Slovak: V bule pápeža Jána VIII. roku 880 Industriae tuae sa oznamuje ustanovenie Vichinga za nitrianskeho biskupa sanctae ecclesiae nitrensis – svätej cirkvi nitrianskej, ktorá bola pod správou arcibiskupa-metropolitu Metoda. Nitra sa takto stala prvým dokumentovaným biskupstvom v strednej a východnej Európe, z tohto obdobia. Bola to prvá diecéza medzi slovanskými národmi. Nemožno ani vylúčiť, že bola zároveň sídlom sv. Metoda-metropolitu.[1] Source is official website of archbishop in Nitra. --Orhtodxbratm (talk) 09:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

This in fact proves the reverse. It is canonically impossible to have more than one bishop in a see, so the fact that Wiching was consecrated to Nitra means that Methodius’s see was elsewhere. Formally it was Sirmium, though it is most unlikely that Methodius ever resided there; the impression that one gets from the Vita is that he moved about a lot, which is no more than one would expect given that he had a newly-constituted (or reconstituted) province to organise. One would assume that he spent much of his time near the seat of secular power (Vyšehrad, or wherever one thinks that it was), but definitely not in a city that had a bishop of its own.Лудольф (talk) 08:43, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I have closed the request for now, as it appears the requested edit is disputed. If consensus turns in favor of the requested edit, please feel free to reopen the request. Monty₈₄₅ 04:28, 25 May 2012 (UTC)