Talk:Macedonians (ethnic group)

The renaming poll of June 2005 (now closed) is archived at Talk:Macedonian Slavs/Poll. (See also Archive 2 for many comments arising from this poll.)

Macedonians in Bulgaria

Ethnic Macedonians in Bulgaria in 1989 and an explanation for the number...

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa260/Piperkata/418-1.png

Can someone add this?

Source: “Ethnic Groups and Population Changes in Twentieth-century Central-Eastern Europe: History, Data, Analysis” By Piotr Eberhardt, Jan Owsinski, 2003, page 418

What Britannica says about the early populations of the area

Macedonia (present region): History – Encyclopaedia Britannica

Macedonia owes its name to the ancient kingdom of Macedonia (or Macedon). Centred in the southern part of the region, (i.e. present-day Northern Greece) this kingdom seems to have been largely Greek-speaking, with Thracian and Illyrian admixtures. By the 4th century bc, it had extended its rule northward into the Balkan Peninsula and throughout the Mediterranean. In the 2nd century bc, Macedonia was made into a Roman province. When the Roman Empire was divided in the 4th century ad into eastern and western halves, Macedonia became part of the eastern half, which became the Byzantine Empire. By this time the population of Macedonia had been largely Christianized. Macedonia’s Greek ethnic composition was overturned by the invasion of Slavic peoples into the Balkans in the 6th and 7th centuries AD.

Paionia (historical region) – Encyclopaedia Britannica

Paeonia, the land of the Paeonians, originally including the whole Axius (Vardar) River valley and the surrounding areas, in what is now northern Greece, (Republic of) Macedonia, and western Bulgaria. The Paeonians, who were probably of mixed Thraco-Illyrian origin, were weakened by the Persian invasion (490 bc), and those tribes living along the Strymon River (in western Bulgaria) fell under Thracian control. The growth of Macedonia forced the remaining Paeonians northward, and in 358 bc they were defeated by Philip II of Macedonia. The native dynasty, however, continued to be highly respected: about 289 bc, King Audoleon received Athenian citizenship, and his daughter married Pyrrhus, king of Epirus. Under the Romans, Paeonia was included in the second and third districts of the province of Macedonia. By ad 400, however, the Paeonians had lost their identity, and Paeonia was merely a geographic term

• Note: It is incorrect citing Britannica in this article biased, i.e. only the article about the history of the area, what is today Northern Greece, ignoring the other article, which points to the history of today R. of Macedonia (Paionia). It is obviously, that this part from the article have to be changed. Jingby (talk) 08:10, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Republic of Macedonia (The Ancient world) – Encyclopaedia Britannica

During the 1st millennium bc the Macedonian region was populated by a mixture of peoples — Dacians, Thracians, Illyrians, Celts, and Greeks. Although Macedonia is most closely identified historically with the kingdom of Philip II of Macedon in the middle of the 4th century bc and the subsequent expansion of that empire by his son Alexander III (the Great), none of the states established in that era was very durable; until the arrival of the Romans, the pattern of politics was a shifting succession of contending city-states and chiefdoms that occasionally integrated into ephemeral empires. Nevertheless, this period is important in understanding the present-day region, as both Greeks and Albanians base their claims to be indigenous inhabitants of it on the achievements of the Macedonian and Illyrian states.

At the end of the 3rd century bc, the Romans began to expand into the Balkan Peninsula in search of metal ores, slaves, and agricultural produce. The Illyrians were finally subdued in ad 9 (their lands becoming the province of Illyricum), and the north and east of Macedonia were incorporated into the province of Moesia in ad 29. A substantial number of sites bear witness today to the power of Rome, especially Heraclea Lyncestis (modern Bitola) and Stobi (south of Veles on the Vardar River). The name Skopje is Roman in origin (Scupi). Many roads still follow courses laid down by the Romans. Beginning in the 3rd century, the defenses of the Roman Empire in the Balkans were probed by Goths, Huns, Bulgars, Avars, and other seminomadic peoples. Although the region was nominally a part of the Eastern Empire, control from Constantinople became more and more intermittent. By the mid-6th century, Slavic tribes had begun to settle in Macedonia, and, from the 7th to the 13th century, the entire region was little more than a system of military marches governed uneasily by the Byzantine state through alliances with local princes.

• Note: Now I propose to change the paragraph in accordance with all three articles from Britannica. Does anyone have a good reason not to support my proposal? Jingby (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I made a small change according to Britannica's passage on the region. Keep in mind that the second paragraph in this artcicle's Origins section is about the arrival of the Slavs in the region of Macedonia, not just Greek Macedonia or RoM. A Macedonian (talk) 06:25, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 96.227.89.95, 12 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

• Please change "[[HLA]]" to "[[human leukocyte antigen]]" because it is not useful to have an undefined acronym or to link to a disambiguation page.

96.227.89.95 (talk) 16:13, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done --Local hero ^talk 21:23, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

This Aricle is disgusting, Racist, and hightly offensive. There will be another war soon if the Macedonians are not given the due respect they deserve, we are an ancient culture, and yet are not allowed to use our proper flag, we are bullied concerning our name by other nations, and will not stand for it much longer. If Wikipedia can leave this article in such an offensive state, I am very disapointed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.89.16.154 (talk) 11:16, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

What Macedonians are you taking about? Greek Macedonians? Albanian Macedonians? or Bulgarian Macedonians? Or, are you referring to the Ancient Macedonians? 174.117.97.72 (talk) 03:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

More Language

sv:Makedonier I've added it. --Laveol ^T 18:39, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Intro

The last two sentences are not typical of an article intro and appear misplaced. Two sentences cannot adequately describe the origin of any people. Furthermore, the origin of the people depicted in this article is far too complex to be summarized in a few sentences. Evidence for this is the extensive coverage here, here and here. --124.148.192.108 (talk) 19:33, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

No one seems to disagree. I'll remove the sentences. --Local hero ^talk 21:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

We shouldn't just remove reliable sourced material. I agree not to have in the lede but I added it in the appropriate Origins section instead. A Macedonian (talk) 07:04, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

---

Macedonians are people with a unique identity derived from an influence of different cultures.

It was rather 'cultural influences', not a mishmash of cultures as is suggested.

The concept of a distinct "Macedonian" ethnicity is seen as a relatively new arrival to the milieu of peoples that is the Balkans.

Considering the time-line for the national revivals itself is short (Ottoman period), it would be misleading to group Macedonians with Bosniaks, Ashkali and Egyptians and Montenegrins, for example. The Macedonian Renaissance which is alluded to in the section ("intellectuals", etc.) occurred during the same period as the other revivals.

Modern ethnographers consider that, until the early 20th century, the Slavic speaking majority in the Region of Macedonia were by and large Bulgarian.

This is also misleading and it's more proper to speak of the Slavic-speakers of Macedonia as divided along religious and political lines which was either Bulgarian, Serbian or Greek. Remember that the awakening of the other peoples was still in full swing.

However, in the late 19th and early 20th century some intellectuals began to propagated that the Slavic-speakers of Macedonia compose a separate ethnicity, which is different from their neighbours.

What were their arguments for doing so? There is a huge gap here.

the idea of belonging to a separate Macedonian nation was further spread among the Slavic-speaking population.

How? Wasn't it those kingdoms attempting to impose their own identity which then led the Macedonians to reject them all? This is one of the most important factors which is then alluded to in the following sentences without any back-story ("On the question of whether they were Serbs or Bulgarians").

the Comintern which issued in 1934 a declaration supporting the development of the entity.

What is the text of the declaration? Did it 'support the development' or did it support their rights?

supported the national consolidation

This is misleading. If an organization supports something's consolidation, it endeavors to do so with programs. If an organization supports something's right to open expression, it facilitates their inclusion.

The sense of belonging to a separate Macedonian nation gained credence during World War II

Where? If a people are already calling themselves something else, where did it 'gain credence' where it didn't have it before?

ethnic Macedonian institutions were created

By the communist party or by the Macedonians themselves?

So much of the wording is deceiving and doesn't explain the order of events. --203.59.151.102 (talk) 07:16, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Genetic relations of European nations.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Genetic relations of European nations.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do?
	Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Macedonians in USA / Canada?

I would love to hear explonation of 200 000 Macedonians in USA or 200 000 in Australia. From US census there are 57,000 Macedonians and from, what? some Word document, without any explanation, there are 200,000 Macedonians? Yes, number of 57 000 in USA is not final, sure some of them have Macedonian origin and don't know or don't want to tell, but you can't multiply with 4 that number. If everybody do that, USA would have 970 000 000 people (you could write - up to 2 000 000 - its still true, its is "up to"). Im sorry Macedonians, but there is as much as Macedonians as census said. Add some 15%, but please, not x4. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.3.120.28 (talk) 17:21, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Let's be reasonable

• If the sources speak of 100,000-300,000 then that's what we should use (though I need to check that that's indeed the case). Substituting 200,000 is OR.
• If only 10,000-30,000 out of 100,000-300,000 Slavic speakers identify as ethnic Macedonians, that easily means most of them do not identify as ethnic Macedonians. Using "not all" is major weasel-wording. Sorry, but there is no way I can accept "not all".
• I'm really sick and tired of seeing partisan websites used as sources. Enough. It's not about quantity, but quality. I don't care if you can come with 50 such websites. If Nova Zora really does have a readership of 20,000, it shouldn't be that hard to find sources on it. There are reliable sources on topics such as these out there (e.g. BIRN).
• Rainbow hasn't participated in national elections since 2004. That is important and should not be hidden from out readers.
• How many individuals identifying as ethnic Macedonians have been elected to local political positions, and have they been elected on an ethnic Macedonian platform, or did they just get elected anyway and just happen to be ethnic Macedonians? Again, sources please. Athenean (talk) 17:25, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't get the point about the 100,000-300,000 people. Thats slavic speakers not ethnic Macedonians that live in Greece. The two are irrelevant in this article. Also, the fact that a Macedonian newspaper in Greece has a readership of 20,000 (which is currently not referenced) proves absolutely nothing; again, language is NOT nationality OR ethnic identity. Also, I am not aware of any politicians who self-identify as "ethnic Macedonians" in Greece; perhaps the person who wrote this can enlighten us? If you ask me, the section on Greece is ripe with OR, unreliable sources and plain nationalism. --Philly boy92 (talk) 17:54, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

It should indeed be sufficient to mention that according to GHM, there are an estimated 10,000-30,000 people in Greece who identify as ethnic Macedonian (maybe also mention Rainbow) and leave it at that. Athenean (talk) 17:57, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I think the rainbow party should definitely be included; however it should be mentioned that it is a nationalist party when it comes to the treatment of Greece by that particular party. Also, since when does Florina, Edessa and Thessaloniki constitute "across northern Greece"?! "Across" means from Florina to Alexandroupolis and even further. --Philly boy92 (talk) 18:11, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

• 200,000 is good middle ground between both of the other estimates.
• 10-30,000 according to whom? Helsinki Monitor. Since when is this figure the be all and all of the matter? Saying "not all" is not weasel words because you are basing your beliefs on a source which itself is acknowledges it is not a concrete figure. The figure is merely an estimate, and is fine to be quoted as such, however it should not be treated as a definate figure (as you have been treating it).
• The newspapers cited are run of the mill newspapers in R. of Macedonia. The sources are considered WP:RS. If you do not like the figure, then the onus is upon you to find sources reflect your belief that readerhsip is less. As far as i'm concerned 3 realiable sourcces have been provided for this.
• Re: Rainbow Party. Why don't you just click Rainbow (political party) and scroll down to 2009 European Elections. Maybe that will finally change your opinion.
• The mayor of Meliti, Pando Aslakov, was elected last year on an ethnic Macedonian platform. Have the sources not been provided for this?
• If you dont like "across" then "in parts of" is fine. Lunch for Two (talk) 23:57, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

• 200,000: again, speakers of Macedonian not ethnic Macedonians.
• Since when is this figure the godsend?: Its not; its a reliable source though.
• The newspaper cited are run of the mill newspapers in R. of Macedonia: completely irrelevant; the article says "several newspaper" and provides absolutely no references as to the plurality of the Macedonian media within Greece.
• Re: Rainbow Party: in 2009 it got 0.09%, in 2004 0.1%, in 1999 0.08%, in 1996 0.05% and in 1994 0.1%. What's your point?
• The mayor of Meliti: actually no, sources have not been provided for this. If they had, I wouldn't have flagged it as "citation needed". Also, one mayor is not several ethnic Macedonians.
• If you dont like "across": it's not a matter of "liking" it or not, Macedonians are concentrated at the north-west part of East Macedonia and the north-east part of Central Macedonia. Northern Greece is made of of East, Central, West Macedonia and Thrace. "Across" as used in that sentence is a WP:PEACOCK word. --Philly boy92 (talk) 00:10, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

• • Agree with Philly boy on this. Not only that, but I can't find 300,000 anywhere, the highest estimate I see is 250,000 in Ethnologue.
  • This is sophistry of a high order. Even if the 10,000-30,000 figure is an estimate, this group comfortably represents a small minority of the Slavic-speakers, i.e. it is not anywhere near ambiguous over whether they are a minority of a majority. If it were say 50,000-100,000 I could agree with you, but it's not. GHM is a reliable enough source, and is moreover a "pro-minority" source, so their figure is likely at the high end of the spectrum. Don't try to spin your way out of this one, it's not going to work.
  • I've been hearing some rude noises about the state of media freedom in RoM. How independent are these newspapers? There is a problem with exclusively and unreservedly relying on such sources. My guess is they are quite far from neutral.
  • Rainbow didn't participate in either the 2007 or 2009 national elections, and in any case never even came close to electing anyone. Also agree with Philly boy.
  • Ditto. And is he a member of Rainbow?
  • Seems like most of this activity is entirely concentrated in a handful of villages in the prefectures of Florina and Pella. No major cities, and not anywhere near "across" or even "parts of" (which would be weasel wording). More like "a tiny part of". Athenean (talk) 00:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

1. I have no issue with the figure being downgraded to reflect the sources. Most sources are at the 180-200,000 mark. PB, at no stage did I write that there was 200,000 ethnic Macedonians on the article.

2. Some reliable sources list the number at 200,000. Some put it at 10,000-30,000. I have reflected the latter (in the hope that it would not lead to edit warring). Therefore to reflect the other viewpoints words such as "not all" and "some" should be used given that some identify as X, others as Y and others as Z.

3. The newspapers are simply recording happenings of events, which are unlikely to be mentioned elsewhere. If there is Greek language media on the issue (which there is, as I have read it), then I dont see why this cannot also be used to support the written information (So long as terms such as "filoSkopianos" which feature in the Greek langauge articles are not used) PB, If you want evidence of other Macedonian newspapers I will be happy to add them, I personally didn't realise that an abnormally high standard was required in these matters, however I am more than willing to back up what I have written.

4. My issue was only that you were adamant that they had not participated. I feel that this has been shown, and is therefore a non-issue now.

5. Yes, the mayor of Meliti is a member of Rainbow. There has been a Macedonian on the Florina prefecture council for the past 9 years (if I remember correctly), and I have also read numerous reports that other Macedonians have been elected in Neochoraki, Achlada, Pappagiannis and Vevi (however I have not posted this, per WP:RS, as I believe that these assertions should be corroborated).

6. Also a non-issue (hopefully) as I have changed the wording.

Although we may disagree on some points, I appreciate the discussion. Lunch for Two (talk) 13:47, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Here is not nationalistic forum. If there are reliable neutral sources, the personal opinion of the editors is not important and when POV is pushed here, it will be reverted or removed. Jingby (talk) 14:20, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Jingiby, unlike the other users you have been less than reasonable. Please engage in constructive dialogue. I do not understand why you simply revert everything either, is there a problem with everything in the edit? Surely this cannot be so. Lunch for Two (talk) 14:32, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there is a problem with everything in the edit. Jingby (talk) 14:37, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

What Jingby means is that your sources should be listed and reviewed here first, so that we can decide whether or not they are reliable and then edit the page and remove the "citation needed" tags. I saw your edit, and I believe that the best thing to do would be to list your sources below my comment, with a translation for the Macedonian ones, so that we can review them and reach a consensus. --Philly boy92 (talk) 17:30, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Also, I have 2 comments about your edits:

1. This article cannot be used as it requires the consent of the author to be cited. It says so on every page.
2. Articles from Macedonian newspapers (which, I believe, are mostly Government-aligned) are not verifiable. Please provide translations as well as the original Macedonian text for review by others.

--Philly boy92 (talk) 17:37, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

It is impractical/unessecary for me to translate the entire source, so I will only post on here what the relevant information to the source is. I will post the links, if people wish they can use Google translate for the entire article.

• "Since then several Macedonian language newspapers have been established"

[1] - Втор весник на Македонците во Грција...Весникот се вика „Задруга“...За нецел месец во Грција излезе уште еден весник на Македонците/A Second Macedonian Newspaper in greece...The Newspaper is Called "Zadruga/Koinothta"...Barely a month ago in Greece another newspaper for the Macedonians was released.

• "the most successful of which, Nova Zora, has a readership of over 20,000."

[2] - „Нова зора“...печати во 20.000 примероци/Nova Zora...is printed in 20,000 copies'

[3] - Весникот е наречен „Нова зора“ и треба да се печати во 20.000 примероци/The Newspaper is called Nova Zora and 20,000 copies are printed.

[4] - „Нова зора“ - прв весник на македонски јазик во Грција...При печатењето на тиражот од 20.000 примероци се појавиле само мали технички проблеми/Nova Zora - the first Macedonian language newspaper in Greece...There were only small technical problems with the printing of the circulation of 20,000

• "Several ethnic Macedonian organisations including the Rainbow Party have been established."

[5] - Ова го најавува новоформираната невладина организација на македонското малцинство во Грција „Образовно и културно движење на Воден“/This has been anounced by the newly formed Macedonian minority NGO organisation the "Educative and Cultural Movement of Voden/Edessa

[6] - Меѓутоа, со формирањето...на фондацијата „Крсте Петков Мисирков“, повторно се овозможува зачувување на македонскиот јазик и културна традиција во Грција...Професорот Кристиан Фос од 2000 до 2005 година работел на студија за македонскиот јазик во Грција./With the formation...of the Krste Petkov Misirkov foundation, once again the preservation of the Macedonian language and culture in Greece has been enabled...Professor Christian Voss from 2000-2005 worked on a study of the Macedonian language in Greece - Quoting the Proffesor on Deutshe Welle (I tried looking for the English version however was unable to find it).

• "However, Rainbow hasn't participated in national elections since 2004 due to lack of funding" - This is not true, as has been shown above and at the Rainbow page.
• "In recent years several ethnic Macedonian have been elected to local political positions"

[7] - Панајотис Анастасиадис, или според неговото родено име Панде Ашлаков, е претседател на селото Мелити (Овчарани)...На овие избори уште четворица Македонци станаа претседатели (слично на нашите градоначалници) на селата: Неокази, Крошодари, Баница и П’пжани /Pangiotis Anastiasidis, or known by his birth name as Pando Ašlakov, is the mayor of the village Meliti (Ovčarani)...at these Elections another four Macedonian presidnents (similar to our mayors) were elected in the villages of Neokazi, Krušoradi, Banica and P'pžani (This second half though should be sourced further if it is to be used)

[8] - English language source with more elected candidates listed.

• "and the language has once again begun to be taught at an unofficial level in parts of Greek Macedonia including Florina, Thessaloniki and Edessa."

[9] - Македонците од Леринско и Воденско ќе можат да го учат македонскиот јазик во приватно училиште, кое наскоро треба да се отвори во Северна Грција...селото Баница веќе има повеќе фамилии што тајно ги носат своите деца во куќа каде што се учи македонскиот јазик./The Macedonians from Lerin and Voden/Edessa will be able to learn the Macedonian language in a private schools which is set to open in Northern Greece... In the village of Vevi (Banica) there are already numerous families who secretly take their children to Macedonian lessons

[10] - Ολοκληρώθηκε με μεγάλη επιτυχία το πρόγραμμα μας για εκμάθηση της γραφής και ανάγνωσης της μακεδονικής γλώσσας για τους ομιλητές αυτής. Το πρόγραμμα συμπεριελάμβανε μαθήματα του κυριλλικού αλφάβητου και κάποια στοιχεία γραμματικής, ώστε οι άνθρωποι που ήδη ομιλούν την τοπική διάλεκτο, να μπορούν να διαβάζουν και να γράφουν σε αυτήν. Λόγο του μεγάλου ενδιαφέροντος για τα μαθήματα, ελπίζουμε να μπορέσουμε να επαναλάβουμε το πρόγραμμα μας την ερχόμενη άνοιξη. Τα προγράμματα των μαθημάτων έχουν δίμηνη διάρκεια και είναι δωρεάν. (Discusses the success of the above classes)

[11] - Во Солун се учи македонскиот јазик...Во Солун е формиран клас од триесетина ученици што го изучуваат македонскиот јазик/In Salonika the Macedonian langauge is taught...In Salonika there has been a class of thirty students formed who learn the Macedonian language

Do these sources back up what was written on the page? I cannot see any factual basis which to claim that that which was written on the page did not in fact occur. Lunch for Two (talk) 03:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

[12]"Првиот број на месечникот „Нова зора“ беше испечатен во 20.000 примероци." >> "The first issue of the monthly "New Dawn" was printed in 20,000 copies." >> Where exactly does it say that it has a readership of 20,000? The fact that it was printed in 20,000 copies does not mean that 20,000 people read it monthly.

[13] "Уредникот на „Нова зора“, Димитри Јованов, кој, исто така, учествуваше на расправата, соопшти дека весникот излегува еднаш месечно, се печати во 20.000 примероци и се разделува во 731 села од Костур до Драма." >> "The editor of "New Dawn", Dimitri Jovanov, who also attended the hearing, said the newspaper published once a month is printed in 20,000 copies and is distributed in 731 villages from Kastoria to Drama." >> again, does not address the readership issue, just that it is printed in 20,000 copies. How many people actually subscribe to Nova Zora?

[14] and [15]; again the same issue as above.

[16] and [17]; no problems there, but I seriously doubt that Mr. Voss is an impartial observer and, in any case, his words alone are not enough to support any "200,000 Macedonians are in Greece" claim. Also his representation of Greece as an apparently opressive country is obviously exaggerated. The articles are good for the organizations though.

[18] and [19]; you are confusing National Elections with Regional Elections. Regional elections are for municipalities (which is what your sources claim), national elections are for the parliament. Rainbow has not participaged in national elections recently. Just regional.

[20]; Yes, this shows that there are some people in Greece who learn the Macedonian language. It does not say how many people attended, it just says many people attended. Very dubious, how much is many? 100? 1000? 10000?

[21]; Again, it does not say how many people are actually studying Macedonian.

These questions need to be answered thoroughly; the topic is sensitive enough as it is. --Philly boy92 (talk) 02:19, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

My rough proposal for the second paragraph, i didn't get into the task of citing every sentence since i have changed the structure of the narrative a bit, but it is based on the produced sources witch i, individually, checked.

Since the late 1980s there has been an ethnic Macedonian revival in Northern Greece, mostly centering around the region of Florina. Ethnic Macedonian organisations including the Rainbow political party have been established. Rainbow has seen limited success at a national level, its best result being achieved in the 1994 European elections, with a total of 7,263 votes. Since 2004 it only participated in European Parliament elections, but a few of its members have been elected in local administrative posts. Rainbow has recently re-established Nova Zora, a newspaper that was first published for a short period in the mid 90's, with reportedly 20,000 copies being distributed free of charge. Other Macedonian language newspapers have seen circulation occasionally as well. Lately, there have been reports of unofficial Macedonian language lessons, at a small scale, in Florina, Thessaloniki and Edessa.

I don't support the recent changes in the first paragraph, they were not an improvement. Any questions, please ask.--IpProtected (talk) 03:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: [13], [14], [15] and [16]. I understand your point and agree with you. The wording can easily be changed to reflect "printed" or "published" as opposed to specifically "readership".

Re: [17] and [18]. I think the purpose of the source (as quoted on the page) has been fulfilled. I feel that this has now been resolved. (ps. I don't remember using Voss to support the statement you made "200,000...")

Re: [19] and [20]. You are right on this point, it was an oversight on my behalf (re: national vs European or local), it can easily be fixed by either writing both (ie. they havent participated in national elections since 2004, but have in European/Local) or removing the mention to this altogether (Both options are equally as acceptable).

Re: [21] and [22] they were simply supporting the quote "and the language has once again begun to be taught at an unofficial level in parts of Greek Macedonia including Florina, Thessaloniki and Edessa." (I think that this has been demonstrated), the issue regarding how "many" learn it (as raised by yourself) is not covered in the articles, and until further clarification is found should probably be left alone. I think that the relevant information it was citing is still valid.

If you revert back to my original edit, but change the parts regarding the "national election" and the "readership" issue to a more acceptable wording, the issue is likely to be mutually acceptable. Lunch for Two (talk) 07:11, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Please, stop edit war. You never has reached consensus here. On a contrary, you are a single POV-pusher and nobody support your extreme views. Do not ignore reliable sources added here and do not delete them. Do not push here biased, partizan or nationalistic issues. Jingby (talk) 13:31, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Right then, after some thought and some waiting, I think the version for the second paragraph proposed by IpProtected is by far the most reasonable of what I've seen so far, so since I don't see any objections, I will move to implement it. Athenean (talk) 01:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Lets not be hypocritical here, Lunch for Two, you are not mixing, you are essentially reverting back to your own version of the second paragraph. Just get our facts straight.--King of Fluid (talk) 14:19, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Nationalistic agenda

Recently in this article was pushed some nationalistic views from sockpuppet of an editor, who was blocked indefinitely long ago. It is interesting that this views are supported by an administrator. What do it mean? For several years this article was relatively neutral, but it become recently a focus of extrem nationalism. At the moment, there is added a number of 180,000 to 300,000 Slavophones in Greece, who were predominantly with ethnic Macedonian consciousness. Let's see what the prestigious University's publishers think on this issue and what is their point of view on this question. The data and sources below are now deleted from this article.

1.Culture and rights: anthropological perspectives, Jane K. Cowan, Marie-Bénédicte Dembour, Richard Wilson, Cambridge University Press, 2001, ISBN 0521797357, pp. 167-173. On page 168 is mentioned that the data for the number of the Slavic-speakers in Greece varies from 10,000 to 1,000,000. It is mentioned also, that a number of the ethnic Macedonians is around 10,000. Under line, look at the note #10, which refers on page 173, where is much more precise data about the number of Slavophones - at a whole between 50,000 and 70,000 people.

2.The Macedonian conflict: ethnic nationalism in a transnational world, Loring M. Danforth, Princeton University Press, 1997, ISBN 0691043566, p. 78. The number of the Slavophones is counted off - 20,000 to 50,000 with around 10,000 of them with Slav Macedonian consciousness.

3. Denying ethnic identity: the Macedonians of Greece, Human Rights Watch/Helsinki (Organization: U.S.); Human Rights Watch, 1994, ISBN 1564321320, p. 13. Human Rights Watch denies to determin any number of this people, but the only reliable neutral source citted in the research is of the US Departament of State. It estimated at 10,000 to 50,000 Slavophones with a small number of them identifying as ethnic Macedonians.

4. Historical dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia, Dimitar Bechev, Scarecrow Press, 2009, ISBN 0810855658,p. 4.</ref> The next source, I had added counted the number of the Slavic-speakers between 50,000 and 100,000, though only a fraction of them with Macedonian self-identification.

5. Politics, power, and the struggle for democracy in South-East Europe, Karen Dawisha, Bruce Parrott, Cambridge University Press, 1997, ISBN 0521597331, pp. 268-269. This source claims there are around 50,000 Slavic -speakers in Greece.

Conclusion: The data in the article now claims: The number of people speaking Macedonian dialects has been estimated at somewhere between 180,000 to 250,000. (Clear manipulation. The reliable data is 50,000 - 70,000.) Not all of these people however have an ethnic Macedonian national consciousness, with many choosing to identify as ethnic Greeks or rejecting both ethnic designations. (Again manipulation. Most of this people or nearly all of them are with Greek self-identification). Jingby (talk) 13:34, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

The vast majority of sources generally place the number at somewhere around 200,000 (give or take), this does not need to turn into a source war.

Your logic is flawed. You rely on the Helsinki Monitor Source that says there are up to 30,000 persons with an ethnic Macedonian identity, then you assert that there are only 50,000 Macedonian speakers. By this logic wouldn't the majority or a substantially large proportion in any case have an ethnic Macedonian identity?! Lunch for Two (talk) 13:57, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring on the Greece section

There has been some edit warring going on on the Greece subsection of the article, despite the discussions above. Therefore I suggest that no further change be made to that section until both paragraphs have been rewritten on the talk page and agreed on by all participants. Thoughts? --Philly boy92 (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Right, the main problem appears to be Lunch for Two's slow but relentless reverting back to "his" version, using misleading edit-summaries. This [22] is not a "mix" between IpProtected's version and Lunch's: It is a straight revert to Lunch's preferred version. There is a relentlessness here, as well as an intent to deceive. I find it extremely hard to assume good faith. It's always nice words from this user in the talkpage, but then back to sterile reverting in the article after a while (WP:CPUSH). Most indicative is the refusal to get the point about "Most" vs. "Not all". The sources clearly attest that the number of Slavic-speakers in Greek Macedonia number in the low hundreds of thousands, and they also attest that the number of people identifying as ethnic Macedonians is in the low tens of thousands. In other words, it is quite clear that the number of individuals with an ethnic Macedonian consciousness is a minority with this linguistic community. Yet, this user obdurately insists on using "Not all of these people identify as ethnic Macedonians" instead of "Most of these people do not identify as ethnic Macedonians". Attempts to discuss this in the talkpage are met with sophistry, evasion, and WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT, followed by reverting in the article. As for the second paragraph, I find IpProtected's proposed version far preferable to Lunch's version. Athenean (talk) 17:01, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Another technique is to use an edit-summary that is correct, but at the same time changing several other things at other places in the article, even re-introdicng misprints that someone else has corrected. Very annoying, to say the least. As to "Most" vs. "Not all": "Not all ..., with many" gives an impression that it is a majority of ethnic Macedonians vs. a fairly large minority. Definitely wrong! But also the "Most ..., with most" solution is a bit misleading. It could mean 40-60 or even 49-51, which is far from the truth. It is also not very good English to repeat the "most" in this way. I think Danforth 1994 [23] gives the solution. Why not use his expression "vast majority": "Most of these people do not identify as ethnic Macedonians, but the vast majority ..."? Regards! --T*U (talk) 20:30, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I guess "Most of these people however do not identify as Macedonians, with many either identifying as ethnic Greeks or rejecting both designations", is an acceptable compromise at this stage. As for the second paragraph, I think that PB92's revision here is a satisfactory one [24], and I think that it should be reverted to this version. Lunch for Two (talk) 02:10, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Not surprising, since that version is after Lunch made the so-called mix. --T*U (talk) 07:25, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Please consider this hypothetical sentence about the demographics of RoM: "Most of the people however are not Albanians, with many being ethnic Macedonians." Not quite acceptable?? Nor is the so-called compromise. Another suggestion for a compromise: "Not all of these people however do identify as Macedonians, with the vast majority either identifying as ethnic Greeks or rejecting both designations". Regards! --T*U (talk) 10:23, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Some quick remarks, the sources set the start at 1989, so it's "late 1980's" or "early 90's". How many are the ethnic Macedonian organizations ? 3 ? 4 ? Why do we need the "several" to introduce their existence ? How many are/were the newspapers ? They are basically two in circulation today. What makes Nova Zora relatively "successful" and not just relatively "noteworthy" ? Note that this is a partisan publication that the editors themselfs call "monthly newsletter" (the literal translation is "monthly information leaflet"), why is the fact that it is printed in 20000 copies important but the fact that it has no subscription and it's distributed free of charge isn't ? How many are the members of Rainbow that have been elected ? Correct me, but again i don't think they are more than 5, so the qualifier should be "few". About the lessons, what's wrong with "small scale" ? they are clearly of small scale, if you think they are noteworthy enough to be mentioned then they should be described as what they are, a small scale phenomenon. The connection with the partisan schools in the civil war is misty, put them next to each other if you want with clear description of each and without synthesizing. All this vague wording only points to a false impression of plurality and "great extent" when most institutional activities center around one entity, Rainbow. And that's why i generally chose it as a point of reference in my version's structure. That's it for now. --King of Fluid (talk) 03:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Agree 100%. I also get the impression that every effort is made by some editors to use wording such that this "revival" appears to be on a far more massive, extensive scale than it actually is (e.g. "several hundred villages across Greek Macedonia"). Athenean (talk) 04:55, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Where is Alexander the Great?

Why isn't Alexander the Great pictured in this article at all? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.71.45.226 (talk) 18:04, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I presume this is some kind of a joke, since it comes from a user from Greece. If nobody objects, I proceed with removing it in a couple of hours. --Laveol ^T 18:09, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

The article "Macedonians_(ethnic_group)" is wrong.

The whole article is based on a fake fact. Macedonia or to correct it Makedonia (in ancient Hellas the letter k was written with a line and a conjoint curve like the letter c in the latin alphabet) existed there long before the Skopjens went there. TO correct what I say the Slavs ethnic group came there about 2500 years ago when the real Makedonians lived there long ago about 4000 years ago. The Real Makedonians had emigrated southwards in the land that stand as north Hellas today about 3000 years ago. They left behind buildings and many ancient artifacts that belong to them but could not be carried away (such as tombs with ancent greek writing etc.). Today's Slavs alphabet was created by 2 men Cyril and Methodius which they tried to civilize and evangelize the slavian people. Today's Skopjen people are descendants of the slavian people that came to that land. So they can not be descendants of the Ancient Makedonians because of that historic truth. Skopjen people cannot be named as Macedonians ethnic Group. It is not true at all. It is a fake fact that some people created and the Skopjen people accepted as true.

If someone believes that I am wrong, then as my people in Hellas say: "let him eat vinegar.".