Talk:Bulgaria

Turks in Bulgaria in Bulgaria article

The passage for the 1984 campaign is at least not in the correct article as none of the Turkish sadistic massacres and ethnic cleanisings against the Bulgarians is shown here. This is completely out of place in the article, not any of the Turkish massacres, genocides and ethnic cleaninising against the Bulgarians is mentioned here! as all in all many details miss in the article it is for nowhere higher than Turks in Bulgaria. It is moreover misleading as 150,000 of these 300,000 returned in Bulgaria. Here only the most important information about Bulgaria is mentioned, and important information about Bulgaria is missing too, instead there is paid attentionin on the communist campaign and then it is among the most important information for the History of Bulgaria, which is ridiculous, at least information about the The Destruction of Thracian Bulgarians in 1913, Stara Zagora massacre etc. should be mentioned, at least. The communist campaign did not include mass sadistic murders and ethnic cleanisings as opposed to the Ottoman massacres, but the worst and offensive is that someone is deleting this .--Ceco31 (talk) 11:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Just because one fact isn't on this page isn't a reason to remove others, you need to provide an actual justification for the edit instead of picking some tit for tat POV clashes. There may be a good reason to remove the single sentence you're complaining about, but the above isn't it. Propose a development of the text, with sources to back up your numerical claims. Frankly, if the Turks ever engaged in ethnic cleansing or genocide, they clearly did a pretty poor job of it. CMD (talk) 12:17, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The Ottoman Empire's genocides and ethnic cleanisings against the Bulgarians excluded from the article:

• 8 million Bulgarians were massacred or killed by the Ottoman Turks between the complete rule 1396-1878, the rest violated by other means and discriminated as animals not human beings if don't convert to Islam
• The Destruction of Thracian Bulgarians in 1913
• Batak massacre
• Stara Zagora massacre
• April Uprising

Not to mention the numerical ethnic cleanisings and massacres and murders against the Bulgarian population carried out by the Greek and Yugoslav and Romanian authorities during the 20th century, but is not honest to describe here in Bulgaria article a campaign which only included name changes of a population with Bulgarian origin and at the same time to not have a single word about the massacres and ethnic cleanisings in Greece, Yugoslavia, Turkey and Romania articles is at least with no justice. Having all these Bulgarian genocides not mentioned in the respective articles, could you please delete the sentence about the Communist campaign?

Unacceptable changes by Maurice07

1.User Maurice07 removed the Bulgarian ethnic group from the Ethnic groups section in the infobox (changing "{{Collapsible list" to "{{unbulleted list").

2. The same user added a regional language section in the infobox (with the following contents: "8.2% Turkish, 3.8% Roma, 0.7% Others"). This is clearly incorrect because in Bulgaria the sole official language is Bulgarian on all levels - National and regional. This means Turkish Roma and other languages have no official status on regional level. Maybe the user Maurice07 is mistaking the term "regional language"(official language on regional level) with "spoken language". Indeed Turkish, Roma and other languages are spoken in Bulgaria. As i understand it, the infobox is for important information about the country. A section about the unofficially spoken languages in the infobox is unnecessary and unwanted. In the United states for example Spanish Arabic French and many other languages are spoken. Does this mean there should be a section in the infobox for all languages spoken in the USA?

3. Same user (Maurice07) removed the the official script - Cyrillic from the infobox. Since the official script is not Latin i think it is important Cyrillic to be mentioned in the infobox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antemin (talk • contribs) 17:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

After Wikiisunbiased fixed the upper 3 problems, user Maurice07 again edited the infobox bringing back all his changes. Removing Bulgarian ethnic group from Bulgaria's page(infobox) - i call this Vandalism! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antemin (talk • contribs) 22:42, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

There are no officially defined "regional languages", so Bulgarian is the only one having a place there. The three largest ethnic groups - Bulgarians, Turks and Roma are the only ones worth mentioning, the rest is not significant enough to merit a place in the infobox. - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 11:20, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Here,there is a lot of misunderstanding. First, of course Bulgarian the only official language in Bulgaria. I don't deny it, in no way. Already,no changes were made in this issue at infobox and Turkish language and Roma language are demostrated under the title of Regional Languages !! This in no way confer legal status. Of course, this aforementioned languages, may take another naming like Spoken Languages​​ or Minority Languges..should be negotiated. This section is not unnecessary for the main country artices. Available in many instances. Austria, Iran, Republic of Kosovo, Romania..etc. CIA World Factbook, a reliable source refers to many users. Infobox contains many mistakes about Ethnic groups. Still don't have any source and rates are completely wrong. In addition, there are few things that I want to. Please, you need to observe the rules of courtesy. For instance:title name (Unacceptable changes by Maurice07) or personal attack by [1] Wikiisunbiased !!! Maurice (talk) 18:50, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Dear Maurice07, the word "unacceptable" in the title does not маке my behaviour uncourteous towards you. Unacceptable is used to classify your changes. It has nothing to do with you personally. In other words - the use of the word "unacceptable" has nothing to do with courtesy. I am sorry if i must repeat myself but since you don't understand i must do it. The title "regional languages" have no legal status in Bulgaria- that is a fact. And since this term "regional language" have legal status in many other countries it can very easily mislead a reader(he reads "regional languages" and he may think these languages are official on regional level). Your suggestion about discussing the option "Minority language" replacing "Regional Language" is also unacceptable and unwanted because this term (Minority language) have no legal status on regional level in Bulgaria (also there is no mention in the Bulgarian constitution about "minority language" or "regional language"). Your next suggestion changing "regional language" with "spoken language" - again inappropriate because the infobox is for important information about the country. Unofficial information about the the other languages (distinct from Bulgarian) which are spoken in Bulgaria is redundant. In schools and in mixed marriage families english , french, german, spanish and other languages are also spoken in Bulgaria. Does this mean they should be included in your section "spoken languages"? Sure i agree that Russian, Armenian, turkish, roma and other languages are also spoken in bulgaria. So if your proposed section "spoken languages" in the infobox have to be correct, it must include all these languages (french german russian etc.). This is clearly redundant information which has no place in the infobox. If you have to make "spoken languages" section on the page about USA (in the infobox) do you know how many languages you should include? Clearly redundant information. One more thing, you give example with Romania, where minority languages are listed in the infobox. In Romania some languages have legal status on regional level. That's why its appropriate the language to be mentioned. In Bulgaria this is not the case - no other language except Bulgarian is legal on all levels of government. One more thing, your changes in the ethnic group i classify as Vandalism. Just look your recent changes in "View history" and you will see you deleted at least 2 times the bulgarian ethnic group from the population of Bulgaria. Fact! Also you deleted the official script section. Since latin script (widely used around the world) is not the official script in Bulgaria the Cyrillic script must be mentioned. Now about the ethnic percentages. Before you changed them they were correct. And i will give you the most reliable link. The official results from the 2011 official census in Bulgaria. Read section 3.4 if you want. http://www.nsi.bg/census2011/PDOCS2/Census2011final_en.pdf Dear Maurice07, please don't vandalize the page about Bulgaria and don't make unacceptable and/or unwanted changes to the page!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antemin (talk • contribs) 01:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Other Wikipedia articles should not be an example for how to make this one. There are no "regional languages" in Bulgaria and listing Turkish and Romani in the infobox as such is indeed misleading. Nobody is denying what the source says, but the formulation of its content is inappropriate. Also, there's no need to list all the under-1% ethnicities up there, it contributes in no way except for making the infobox heavier. All the information on these is in Demographics. - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 07:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 5 March 2013

Can someone who speaks Bulgarian verify "approximately 70,000 of them are engaged in criminal activities" cited in source [223]? The translation of the page appears to state only that 700,000 of Bulgaria's population, 10% of 7 million, are Roma. 143.229.244.61 (talk) 07:06, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

 Note: The whole passage has been removed with this edit.  — daranz [ t ] 21:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Fatherland Front and Red Army

The Fatherland Front was organised more than a year before the Soviet armed forces entered Bulgaria, and by that time it had already staged a number of strikes and armed attacks. The entry of the Red Army aided the FF's arrival to power, not its activities. It's in the source. - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 06:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

According to the Germans, in August 1944 the partisans in Bulgaria, including Greek and Yugoslav occupied territories, i.e. not only the Bulgarian partisans were only 12,000 people and their activity was not significant. In August 1944, the Soviet Army was approaching the Balkans. On 23 August, Romania left the Axis Powers, declared war on Germany, and allowed Soviet forces to cross its territory to reach Bulgaria. At that time, Bulgaria made a drive to find separate peace, repudiating any alliance with Nazi Germany, and declared neutrality on 26 August. However, its secret negotiations with the Allies in Cairo failed, because Bulgaria was "not in a position to argue". On September 2, the Russian troops reached the border on the Danube and the pro-German government of Ivan Bagryanov stepped down in response to the Red Army's advance towards Bulgaria. A pro-Western government of the former legal opposition came to power. It ordered the army not to resist the Soviet forces, demanded that the Wehrmacht leave, repudiated the union with Germany and started negotiations with the NOVA commander Dobri Terpeshev. The right-wing Agrarians, who controlled the government, offered the FF some ministerial positions. Advancing Soviet troops gave the Communists self-confidence and they rejected the Agrarians' offer. In the meantime, the police and the army continued to pursue the leftist partisans, unchecked by civil authority. On 5 September, the Soviet Union declared war on Bulgaria and on the next day invaded. Within three days, the Soviets occupied the northeastern part of Bulgaria along with the key port cities of Varna and Burgas. At the same time, between 6 and 9 September 1944, many Bulgarian towns in non Soviet-occupied area were captured by the partisans. This turn of the events, put the Bulgarian 5th. Army stationed in Macedonia, in a difficult situation, surrounded by German divisions, but it moved back to the old borders of Bulgaria. On September 8, the Bulgarians changed sides and declared war to Nazi Germany. However, in Sofia, "Zveno" mobilised its influence in the military and strong army detachments, including the Tank brigade, sided with the FF and staged a coup on the night of 8/9 September. On 9 September, Terpeshev ordered all partisans to descend from the mountains and seize power in all of Bulgaria. Afterwards the marking time Soviet Army occupied the whole of the country. Jingiby (talk) 09:09, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Source ? - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 14:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

• Bulgaria during the Second World War, Мarshall L. Miller, Stanford University Press, 1975, ISBN 0804708703, рр. 202-216.;
• I saw Russians take over Bulgaria, Charles Lanius, Reader's Digest,October 1945. Jingiby (talk) 15:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

The second one is easily dismissable, and the first one mentions almost nothing about strikes and resistance before September. I moved the Wartime Crisis ref. The second paragraph clearly mentions the origins of the FF and the domestic instability. There's no point in denying that the Communist resistance, not widespread as it may be, was very active long before the arrival of the Soviets. - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 07:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)