Talk:Blagoevgrad Province

Untitled

There was a move request to "Oblast", but a small majority was opposed. Radiant_>|< 00:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Oblasts of Bulgaria==Removal of dear all== This article below is without any connection to the article.We are not talking about the macedonian issue but for the Blagoevgrad province.It is too long and not to the point.It contains personal and biased views,not supported with facts.I think that removing my articles is vandalism!!!

Dear all

I am writting about the issue of Macedonia, Republic of Macedonia, Macedonian Slavs (like Wikipedia calls the Macedonians) and the problem between Macedonia and Greece about the term Macedonia. I am aware that this issue is largely discussed here, at Wikipedia, and Wikipedia claims that it is trying to take a neutral side. But, that is not the case. Wikipedia is everything except neutral in this question. In the following lines I will explain you why.

From the text in Wikipedia most of the people will conclude that Macedonian nation appeared during the World War 2 and Tito was the one who 'invented' us. The family of my wife (she is Mexican) read this and asked me is it truth. That was actually the first time I read what Wikipedia says about my nation, which was a direct reason for my reaction. My grandfather is born in 1911th. Yesterday I had a talk with him. He took a part in the strugle for independence since 1925th and he took a part in the 2nd world war. He is alive and personal prove that Wikipedia is full of bullshit and lies about our origin. He spent half of his life proving and fighting for that. He was shot 3 times, all 3 from the Bulgarians who wanted to ocupy Macedonia in the Balkan wars and in the WW1 and WW2. Just a 1 min with him will show you how many lies you suport in Wikipedia.

I tried to edit some of the text few days ago, but everithing I wrote was deleted. And all I wrote were facts. Fact 1. Macedonians (or Macedonian Slavs, like ONLY Wikipedia, Greece and Cyprus calls us) is the only nation of many living in the area concentrated inside the borders of the geographical region of Macedonia. This is a pure fact, something that you can even find on the CIA web page. Can you give any fact to deny my fact? If you can not, why you erased it from Wikipedia? Fact 2. Republic of Macedonia has diplomatic relations with about 150 countries in the world. Wikipedia says that "at least 20" countries recognize Macedonia under the name Macedonia. Guess what? That number is more than 100. And this is an officially confirmed by our ministery for foreighn affairs. Fact 3. Wikipedia says that my country Contraversialy calls itself Republic of Macedonia. This is a pure example of taking a side in the problem. Why you don't say that Greece contraversialy deny us the use of the name Macedonia? If you intended to be neutral, just write that we have the naming problem with Greece, but do not call my name "contraversial"!!! Fact 4. While explaining about the antient Macedonia, its kings etc. you highly support the claim for their Greek origin. I can give you 1000s of facts that that is not truth and I beleive that some Greek guy can give you 1000s facts that those claims are truth. That was 2400 years ago and there is no chanse for us to know the real situation. We can only guess. But, when you give the Greek suported version, why you ignore the version suported by the newaged Macedonians? In this moment I can give you 10 names of internationally respected scientist supporting our theory. If you are neutral, why you ignore it? Fact 5. Wikipedia says that the Turkish Empire were calling us Bulgarians. Strange, because the Turks were recognizing the uniqueness of our nation since the moment they occupied the teritory of Macedonia. Actually, the Turkish history archives are the biggest prove of our existance, history and culture. Did anyone of you ever read anything from those archives? Even on the birth certificate of Khemal Ataturk says that he is born in Bitola, Macedonia. And his autobiography is full of memories of his childhood spend with the Macedonians. Fact 6. Wikipedia ignores the egsodus of the Macedonian people from Greece and says they were running because they were supporters of the comunists. 1/3 of the Macedonians have origin from this part of Macedonia. They were runned away from there by force and you can find many historical proves for that. Again, big part of my family has origin from there. As a matter of fact, my grand-grand father was married to a Greek woman, my grand-grand mother. But, no matter of that, his house was burned and he was forced to run away for his life and the life of his family. How dare you deny this? Do you know that even today my grand father is not allowed to visit Greece, because he was a kid when his family runned away from there? Fact 7. There are about 500 000 Macedonians that live outside Macedonia, mostly in Canada, Australia, USA, Sweden etc. At least 1/3 moved there before 1930s. If we were a product of Tito, how can you explain that even they feel of Macedonian nationality? I have a family in USA which moved there in 1927th. Their ancestors (my cousins) do not even know how to talk Macedonian well. But, they still feel Macedonian. One of them is even one of the financiers of the party of the Macedonians in Bulgaria, trying to help their strugle to keep their national identity. I repeat, first time he visited Macedonia was in 1995th, far after Tito. And his family moved in USA in 1927th, far before Tito. Fact 8. Wikipedia claims that the book of Macedonian songs by Dimitar Miladinov is actually Bulgarian. Have you maybe seen a original copy of the book, printed in Croatia? IT says clearly "Macedonian". Not to mention that the same author wrote one of the most important books in the Macedonian history "For the Macedonian issues", again printed in Croatia, where it clearly talks about the Macedonian nation and non-Bulgarian origin.

All this was simply erased from the database. I didn't erase anything when editing these pages, I support the other side and I do not want to hide their facts. But why Wikipedia wants to hide our facts, which show that we are not a product of Tito's ambitions for the Aegean Sea. In Tito's time, the Yugoslav army was far superior in the region. If he wanted the Aegean Sea, he would get it very easily.

Many things in Wikipedia are very offensive for the nowdays Macedonians. Wikipedia simply ignores us, gives us a new name and supports the theories of denial of our existance, culture and history.

I will try to give you an example that includes with Mexico. I beleive that you know that the Maya civilisation was invaded by the Spanish kingdom. Spanish were ruling Mexico for centuries and millions of Spanish people moved at Mexican teritory. Later, after the liberation war, Mexicans formed its own country. Fact 1. Mayas were living in Mexico (same as Antique Macedonians). Fact 2. Spanish invaded them and great number of Spanish people moved to Mexico (The Slavs moved on the theritory of Macedonia and there was no reported fights or movements of people away from the teritory where the Slavs settled). Fact 3. Nowdays, everyone of the Mexican is aware that they are partly Spanish, but they still have Mayan origin (Wikipedia says that the people living in Republic of Macedonia are Slavs. When there was no reported resetling of the Antique Macedonians, how is possible they not to mix with the Slavs? It is a fact that the nowdays Macedonians are not same as the Antique Macedonians, but they certanly have a significant part of their genes. Same as I beleive that Greece has a part of their Genes, but they are definitly not their direct ancestors). Fact 4. Mexican speak Spanish. Reason: The Spanish culture was superior in that time. (The Antique Macedonians accepted the Helenic culture, including a variation of the Greek language. Reason: the Helenic culture was superior in that time. Everyone who knows at least little history will know that Hellenic and Greek are not synonims. Greek is nation, Hellenic is religion/culture. USA and England both speak English, both are mostly cristians, but they are SEPARATE nations. Aren't they? Same happens to Germany and Austria, or Serbia and Croatia, or Canada and France, or Brazil and Portugal, or the rest of Latin America and Spain)

And here is a comment about the claims of the Bulgarians, that the Macedonians are actually Bulgarians. If that is truth, I am going to kill myself. Bulgarians through the history made the worst for my nation. During the strugle of the Macedonian people for independence from the Turkish empire, at the end of the 19th and begginbing of the 20th century, the Bulgarians were the ones who killed the most of our revolutionaries, including 4 members of my close family which were members of the Macedonian revolutionary organization (VMRO). Whis is not something that I was told by Tito. My grandfather (the same grandfather from above) was in fact a member of the same organization. He personaly knew many of the revolutioners that Bulgarians claim are theirs, including 2 of the leaders: Goce Delcev and Gorce Petrov. They were Macedonians and they all gave their lives for free and independent Macedonia and they had nothing to do with Bulgaria. There was a part of them who were Bulgarians inserted in the organizations, who were actually the killers of the real Macedonian revolutioners, because it was in Bulgarian interest to weaken the organization, so they could take the lead in the organization and later put Macedonia in the hands of the Bulgarians. Thanks god, they did not succeed. Wikipedia claims that VMRO was pro-Bulgarian and the revolutioners were Bulgarian fighters. You suposed to see the face of my 94 year old grandfather when I told him your claims. Neurtal Wikipedia? I do not think so.

At the end I have to ask for Wikipedia NOT TO TAKE A SIDE IN THIS. I am not asking to remove the Greek and Bulgarian side of the story. But, why you ignore our claims, which are suported by many non-Greek and non-Bulgarian scientists and very largely through the web. There are just about 2-2.5 million Macedonians around the world. We do not have enought influence and strenght as Greece has, which is much more powerful and richer country than Macedonia. The Macedonian-Greek question is too hard and too complicated to solve. History can be interpreted in 1000 ways, especially on a teritory like the Balcany, where there are so many nations on so little space. Fortunately, DNA testings are getting more and more reliable and soon it will be possible to be used to acuratelly show the origin of our nations. I hope that then the denyal of me, my history, culture and existance will finaly stop. It is very disapointing that Wikipedia takes a part in all that.

With all the respect, Igor Šterbinski Skopje, Macedonia is@on.net.mk

I AGREE 100% with Igor!! Have a look at this page: http://www.unitedmacedonians.org/macedonia/stefov1.html And its a Canadian page, not Macedonian! Arnegjor 11:04, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

---

ALL the Macedonian history (the one that the Macedonians, the one that Wikipedia calls Macedonian Slavs) before the 6th century is given in Wikipedia as Greek history. I am talking mostly about the Antient Macedonia. I do not claim that Macedonians (Macedonian Slavs in Wikipedia) have the exclusive right to this history. But, Greece can not have that right eighter. It is a history that this region shares and both, we (Macedonians) and Greeks have a part of our origin from those people. In the same time ALL the Macedonian history after the 6th century is given in Wikipedia as Bulgarian history. I am talking about the Wikipedia claims that in the 9th century the Macedonian Slavs got Bulgarized or assimilated by Greece, that in the 10th century Macedonia become a center of Bulgaria (which is not truth, because there are 1000s of hard proves and writtings found in Ohrid denying the Bulgarian claims), the tzar Samoil kingdom (which was everything than Bulgarian, because he had several fights with them and won in all and you can find again 1000s of proves in his fortress in Ohrod), then the Macedonian Ohrid Archbishopry which was clearly Macedonian and everything else than Bulgarian, with dressings and crowns with a completely different stile than the Bulgarian ones. Later Wikipedia claims that after 1018th Byzantine Empire makes Macedonia a Bulgarian province, but it doesn't say the reason for it (the Bulgarians were fighting at his side, so this was his reward towards them, something that will happen in the WW2, when the biggest part of Macedonia will be given to Bulgaria by the Germans. 3 of 4 sons of Samoil were actually latter killed by pro-Bulgarians Another reason is the wish of Vasili II to make a revenge towars Samoil and his people, with denying them, something that Wikipedia does NOW). Then, Wikipedia claims that the Ottoman Empire was seeing us as Bulgarians, which is completely not truth. You have incredible written archives in Turkish museums for this, so you can make a search by your own. All the Macedonian uprisings were characterised as Macedonians. Even the after-capture execution of the leaders was taking place in Skopje, the biggest town in the teritory of Macedonia and not in Sofija, which was the Bulgarian biggest town. Wikipedia says that the following Macedonian history is Bulgarian: IMRO, Ilinden Uprising in Krusevo (where the only newspapers that write about it as Bulgarian uprising are the ones who didn't have their Journalists in the region and were using the Bulgarian sources, which in that time was already liberated, who wanted to show the uprising as their own. Why you don't read some Russian sources which have their journalists in Krusevo and Bitola at the time? Some of the grand sons and grand daughters of the revolutioners are still alive, so you might ask them what their grand-fathers were fighting for. The Krusevo Manifesto says that their goal is FREE and INDEPENDENT Macedonia. Why would their form their own Republic, if they wanted to be part of Bulgaria? All Wikipedia claims simply have no sence), Goce Delchev and the other revolutioners (NOTE: Goce Delchevs nephews which are still alive all spent half of their life proving Goce Delchev's belongding to the Macedonian nation. NOTE 2: Why would he fight for Macedonia's independence if he was Bulgarian? If he was Bulgarian, wouldn't he fight for unification of Macedonia and Bulgaria? Why was he betrayed by a Bulgarian, which resultet in his death in Banica 1903rd? You are corupting our biggest revolutioner, something that we keep as a saint). Wikipedia says that the "St Cyril and Methodius" high school in Solun, where Delchev studied was Bulgarian. How come, when no Bulgarians were living in Solun?... A prove for the Bulgarian, Serb and Greek ambitions to assimilate the Macedonians and take their teritory is the deals and fights they had in the both Balcan wars. They were all exterminating the Macedonians, burning their houses and grabbing their lands, but Wikipedia completely ignores all that. I (and many more) have a living family members who were witnesses of that time. Then, the WW2, when 2/3 of Macedonia was given to Bulgaria by the Germans. Why the hell 100000 Macedonians were fighting against the Bugarians? 25000 died in that war, again many members of my family. And Wikipedia says that we have Bulgarian origin. Why they didn't fight at the Bulgarian side if that was the case? Wikipedia later claims that our country (Republic of Macedonia) was given to us by Tito. What a lie!!! As I said 100000 Macedonians were fighting for freedom. If Tito made us be under the Serbs again, that wouldn't be freedom and 100000 heavily armed Macedonians would continue fighting for it. Even my 94 year old grand-father, who took a part in the WW2 fighting for the partizans, and who was looking at Tito as a saint agrees with this, that he wouldn't rest till he saw Macedonia free. Wikipedia even denies the exodus of 250 000 Macedonians from Greece, saying they were running away by their own. Who the hell will leave his house and land if he was not forced to? My other grand father's house was burned and he was shoot at in order to make him leave his hometown.

On some places Wikipedia says that this 'Bulgarian part' of the history might be Macedonian, but that is very well hidden so it even can hardly be noticed.

On the other hand, Wikipedia says that 'In 2000 several teenagers threw smoke bombs at the conference of pro-Bulgarian organisation 'Radko' in Skopje causing panic and confusion among the delegates'. Yes, that is completely truth. But in 1000s of years, you find one incident that we caused against the Bulgarians and you wrote it. What about centuries of incidents, murders, wars, assimilation made by the Bulgarians towards the Macedonians? What about the fact that Bulgaria and Greece do not allow the Macedonian parties in those countries to register and take a part in the ellections? This is something that was taken even to the European court. HOW CAN WIKIPEDIA IGNORE THIS??? BTW, Radko had just about 50 delegates and members. Most of them born in Bulgaria and moved latter in their life in Macedonia.

In this case, Wikipedia is only a tool in the Bulgarian and Greek propaganda of denying and stealing the Macedonian history, culture and existance. Just search the internet and you will see that this kind of 'history' can ONLY be found on pro-Bulgarian and pro-Greek web sites. I am a living prove of the existance of the Macedonian nation. And that is not because I was told so by Tito. Macedonians were Macedonians far far before Tito. That is a fact that NOONE can change. How dare you deny everything what I am? How dare you to deny 1000s of killed people, who gave their lives for FREE and INDEPENDENT Macedonia?

Senceirly, Igor Šterbinski Skopje, Macedonia

---

---

JUST SEARCH THE WEB, YOU CAN SEE HOW WRONG WIKIPEDIA IS!!! ONLY THE PRO-BULGARIAN AND PRO-GREEK SITES HAVE THE SAME CLAIMS AS WIKIPEDIA. MOST OF THEM ARE ONLY CLAIMS THAT ARE CONFIRMED BY FALSIFICATED LETTERS. The TURKISH WERE SUPERIOR AT THAT TIME AND ARE A NEUTRAL SIDE. AND FAR BIGGER PART OF THEM IDENTIFY THE MACEDONIANS AS SEPARATE NATION, MACEDONIANS. WIKIPEDIA IS NEUTRAL??? I DO NOT THINK SO!!!

---

---

You know, Wikipedia has nothing to do with this, there's no corporation or entreprise called "Wikipedia". The only persons writing articles here are members like you and I. If it appears as though the pro-Greek and pro-Bulgarian sides are shown a lot more than the pro-Macedonian one, that's probably because there's more Bulgarians and Greeks out there writing and editing the articles. In that case it is your job and that of the other Macedonians to balance it out. User:Red Star

By the way, do you expect people to read all of your rant? It's 10 times longer than the article!

WHY DO YOU ONLY USE PRO-GREEK AND PRO-BULGARIAN SOURCES AND NOT NEUTRAL ONES? CHECK THIS: http://www.unitedmacedonians.org/macedonia/stefov1.html

Arnegjor 11:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

This site isn't neutral, but VERY pro-Macedonian. It might be from Canada, but was set up by immigrant Macedonians, and represents a clear point of view, not being neutral at all. So I don't believe it's a useful source, and doesn't even deserve more than mentioning. → Тодор Божинов / Todor Bozhinov → Talk 20:00, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand why you rant here - use the macedonia discussion page instead. If you feel macedonian - this is fine with me, but what is the connection with Blagoevgrad Province? Peace

Macedonian national minority in Pirin Macedonia

• Political Party of the Macedonian Minority in Bulgaria

In fact OMO Ilinden - Pirin isn't political party but a small group of enthusiasts of yugoslav macedonian ethnic idea. It isn't registered and probably it never will be registered because of too small number of supporters. According to 2001 census there are only 3 117 ethnic Macedonians in the district.

'OMO Ilinden - Pirin has 4, 500 - 5, 000 members, and most of them (99%) say, they are ethnic Macedonians! And, as it happens, they have families who also (as it happens - again!) claim to be of Macedonian ethnic origin!

And, this is well known fact(for everybody except the Bulgarians themselves!!!): Pirin Macedonia has always been Macedonian! Do not believe? Just face the truth:http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/MacedonianMinorities/images/eurominority.jpg

I removed the link below

• Blagoevgrad Province on the Eurominority Map

from the main article and pit it here, in the discussion, because this map represents wrong data about demography of Blagoevgrad region and besides that the link leads to macedonian nationalistic site History of Macedonia, which exposes only the macedonian hypertrophic point of view. I offer you a strong evidence about lies, which traditionally come from Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia, about the existence of large macedonian ethnic minority in southwest Bulgaria. This is an excerpt from the sentence of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg from the cases of OMO Ilinden and OMO Ilinden PIRIN Against Bulgaria (20.10.2005):

"Moreover, there was no indication that the applicant party had any real chance of bringing about political changes which would not meet with the approval of everyone on the political stage. Indeed, it was recognised that the public influence of the applicant party was negligible. It therefore appeared that the constitutional court’s holding that the applicant party’s activity truly “imperil[ed] [Bulgaria’s] national security” was not based on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts."

The source of that text is the site of OMO Pirin: Macedonian Minority Organizations, OMO Ilinden and OMO Ilinden PIRIN, Win Landmark European Court of Human Rights Cases Against Bulgaria

In the similar case, sentenced on 19 january 2006, the court stated that there are only over 3 000 supporters of the macedonian ethnic movement in this region and, still more, not all of them were active. As it is obvious, there isn't any large macedonian ethnic minority in Blagoevgrad province and there aren't any significant ethnic macedonian organisations in Bulgaria. And, of course, it is logical - after last bulgarian census there are only 3 117 ethnic Macedonians in the district. As a conclusion I beg the macedonian nationalists from Former Yugoslavian Repubilc of Macedonia to stop their interference in the demography data in that article.

POLL: Introduction for Republic of Macedonia article

Given ongoing discussions and recent edit warring, a poll is currently underway to decide the rendition of the lead for the Republic of Macedonia article. Please weigh in! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 01:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Western Bulgaria

I cannot imagine where you will come across Blagoevgrad Province as Pirin Macedonia. This is not Greece with a province of Macedonia that is referred to as such by the European Union. This is Bulgaria and Sofia has not presented any 'Pirin Macedonia' region of province to the EU. So we have to accept that it is the wishful thinking of Skopje dreamers. I have no problem with that but this is not the place to dream, but to present facts. Makedonija 12:04, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

To your suprise, the name is used by Bulgarians too — in a historical context and indeed very often by the modern IMRO. If you have to call the slice of Macedonia that's today in Bulgaria somehow, you would call it Pirin Macedonia. I find the name quite neutral and unoffensive, although I understand you concerns, because Macedonists like to emphasize the Macedonia part of the name. But they surely know Macedonia is a disambiguation page in Wikipedia :)

Also, have you ever thought that offending the others isn't the right way to deal with being offended? There are certain well-thought-over principles of Wikipedia that you should make yourself familiar with. Todor→Bozhinov 20:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Todor, you have just proved my point, IMRO! talks about Pirin Macedonia and we know what they want. But most Bulgarians have no idea what Pirin Macedonia means. Perhaps you disagree but there are no statistics either way. But that is not the main issue. The real situation why this has to be removed is because there are no official documents in Bulgaria, Europe or UN with that 'province' and there are no maps with that name (and please do not tell me you found one or two in Skopje or IMRO offices). So how can we justify placing 'Pirin Macedonia' up in the first paragraph? If there are some Greeks who, because of 'Nevrokop' and 'Melenikio' and a few other villages where Greek used to live, might call it 'Greek Macedonia', do we have to mention that as well? You bet no! I do not find the name 'Western Bulgaria' offensive for Republic of Macedonia and many Bulgarian call it like that. So I hope you will agree to include 'Western Bulgaria' in Republic of Macedonia and I will agree to keep Pirin Macedonia. Makedonija 14:47, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Errr, are you sure you know that IMRO is? I don't mean this IMRO nor even the historical IMRO, I mean the modern Bulgarian IMRO. It's a perfectly patriotic and pro-Bulgarian organization, espacially regarding the Macedonian issues, what's the problem with it?

Generally, names of historical regions or their parts are not displayed on maps when not an official entity, but this does not mean they don't exist.

Also, the name is not offensive itself — it's not 'Northern Ethnic Macedonia', it just describes it as part of the region (because that's what it is) based on one of its main features. It's not used only by ethnic Macedonians, but also by neutral sources, as proven.

The name is incredibly offensive to the Macedonians, believe me. They get offended even when people call their country FYROM, not to mention that.

Finally, Greek Macedonia is a different thing. And the name Pirin Macedonia doesn't imply in any way that the area's population is ethnic Macedonian (because it's never been, and a Macedonian national consciousness never formed there). Todor→Bozhinov 17:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I see that you are happy with the terms used but I do not know which are the 'neutral sources' you are referring; I am sure you are right but please point them out.

But here is one of my examples. The government in the republic of macedonia published many books claiming territories from every single neighbour. For Bulgaria we have, Historical truth: liberal public opinion in Bulgaria and in Pirin Macedonia on the Macedonian national question 1896-1956, edited by Pero Korobar and Orde Ivanovki, Skopje 1984. You will notice that the title considers Bulgaria as a separate territory from 'Pirin Macedonia' which is exacly what the editors try to prove in the book. Inside you will find articles like, 'The overwhelming majority in teh Pirisn region is Macedonian', by Gerogi Madolev (1948), or that that the fact that Bulgarian are in Pirin Macedonia is a proof that the Bulgarians want a 'Greater Bulgaria'. I am happy that you are not offended but I am worried that the terminology of an 'unliberated Macedonia' is so widespread.

The Bulgarians or the Greeks or anyone else in Europe does not use such irridentist terminology. The Serbs did it and I am relieved to see that they are paying a heavy price. So I think we cannot simply accept the republic of macedonia and its propagandists to institutionalise through the back door ambiguity with the term Macedonia. Makedonija 14:29, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

See United Macedonia. FYROM paid a price - a tight economic block from Greece, and a naming dispute obstacle to joining the EU. Had they not made the irredentists claims, for example depicting the White Tower of Thessaloniki on their currency, published irredentist maps, and used symbols from the city of Vergina in Greece, there probably wouldn't have been a naming dispute, and FYROM (or Republic of Macedonia as it would have been known) would be ascending to the EU on New Year (together with Bulgaria and Romania). I guess they went too far... --Tēlex 14:35, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Bulgaria is facing many problems to join the EU. But look at Albania and Moldova, they are economically and socially much worse off and they are like republic of macedonia. It is not because of the Greeks that they are not in. You think Skopje was worried about economic blockade? They are still refusing to link up the rail link with Bulgaria!!! It is only 14 kilometers to complete, Bulgarians say yes but they say no. Makedonija 14:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Haha, that reminds me why the Chunnel was delayed so much, since plans were drawn in the 1950's. The British were seriously scared of the French invading through the tunnel. I guess the Republican government might be afraid that the 14 km rail line might be used to bring tanks and troops.   /FunkyFly.talk_   15:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying that that's the only problem, but the naming dispute will certainly slow the whole process down even though it is not necessary to resolve it before ascension, and I don't think you can compare R. Moldova or Albania to FYROM. They already have candidate status. --Tēlex 14:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I have not seen official documents from EU presenting the name isse. All the objections concentrate on other issues (R Moldova has candidate status? but the country is divided into two like republic of macedonia between east and west) Makedonija 14:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

See [1]. --Tēlex 15:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know [2] but thank you. There only one mention about the effects of the name: "Relations with Greece have improved in the last few years. Greece is the most important investor in the country (57% of the total foreign investments) and trade has been constantly increasing. However the dispute over the name of the country has remained an open issue since 1993." So it is an open issue - that is all, together with the open issue with claiming Blagoevgrad Province but Bulgaria is not in the EU and so this does not get mentioned. Makedonija 15:34, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Look, they can "claim" whatever they want. No one is going to annex the Blagoevgrad Province, no one is going to annex northern Greece or anything else. The Helsinki Accords seem to be getting in the way of this (although they didn't stop the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechslovakia splitting up - perhaps they are ignored in practice :p). As the number of people self-identifying as "Macedonians" is minimal outside of FYROM, I don't think that anyone takes them seriously. --Tēlex 15:40, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Size is not important. Of course they can claim whatever they want. But they are also pushing their irredentist talk everywhere like here in Wikipedia. Size does not matter to cause chaos. There are many crazy people who think they have god on their side or that they are suffering because of crazy thinking about historical injustice and then they build an ideology that says you are allowed to do anything against other people. I think these people of republic of macedonia already have a machinery to cause harm like their extremists did in the war against the Albanians. It is our duty to expose them because we want to build roads and communications and cooperation and we do not want to build dangerous differences. Makedonija 15:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Is the name Pirin Macedonia OFFENSIVE for many Bulgarians?

I was threaten by Todor Bozhinov:

"3RR You've violated the three-revert rule on Pirin Macedonia. I'm not sure you're familiar with it and I'm not going to report you for now (you haven't been warned), but if you revert once more you'll very likely be reported and blocked.

By the way, I don't see what's the problem with my version — many people find the name exactly offensive — you fall in the other category, so it's just a matter of how people see it today. Recent Macedonistic propaganda has played a role in this resentment against the name by some Bulgarians, no doubt about it. Todor→Bozhinov 13:17, 8 July 2006 (UTC)"

The reason is the next Todor Bozhinov's note:

"The name 'Pirin Macedonia' is regarded as offensive by many Bulgarians, who assert that it is widely used by Macedonists as part of the irredentist concept of United Macedonia. However, many people in the country also think of the name as a purely geographical term, which it has historically been. Its use is, thus, controversial."

Dear Todor Bozhinov, for me your redaction is neither true nor acceptable and yes, I doubt about it. Don't you think you should prove that for MANY Bulgarians the name Pirin Macedonia is offensive? Please give to the readers and authors of the Wikipedia reliable arguments for that assertion.

I haven't threatened you in any way, I was just making you aware of important Wikipedia policies — I warned you because you're in danger of being blocked. I'm not the one who could block you (I don't have that privileges), but it's very likely you could be reported. I have nothing against you to threaten you whatsoever, actually, I was trying to help you.

Regarding your doubts, just see User:Makedonija's edits to the page and the discussion with him. Todor→Bozhinov 14:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Dear Todor Bozhinov, I'm more than surprised from your answer. Do you really think that a discussion here could prove the assertion that for MANY Bulgarians the name Pirin Macedonia is OFFENSIVE? Are there any debates in the bulgarian society about that offence? Are there any social, political or cultural clashes after such public discussion? Please, give us some RELIABLE ARGUMENTS from the life outside Wikipedia.

P. s. User Makedonija could be personally offended, but see what he have said above: "But most Bulgarians have no idea what Pirin Macedonia means." Dear Todor Bozhinov, therefore this name couldn't be OFFENSIVE for MANY Bulgaians...

The last version of Todor Bozhinov is milder so I can't say anything against it:

"Despite a history of use by Bulgarian nationalists, the term 'Pirin Macedonia' is today regarded as offensive by certain Bulgarians, who assert that it is widely used by Macedonists as part of the irredentist concept of United Macedonia. However, many people in the country also think of the name as a purely geographical term, which it has historically been. Its use is, thus, controversial."

So we can say you're satisfied with that formulation? Todor→Bozhinov 17:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm unregistered user IP 85.187.163.40. Dear Todor, I don't think that this was a matter of my satisfaction, but I agree with this last formulation. As I already said, it is milder, truthful and hence acceptable.

Battle of Kleidon image

85.187.163.40 and TodorBozhinov seem to be involved in an edit war on the inclusion of an image illustrating the Battle of Kleidion. As this battle took place within present-day Blagoevgrad Province, it is related to the subject, but it is not yet related to the content of the article. I propose to include the picture on the condition that 85.187.163.40 (or someone else) also writes a short history section that the image can relate to. Preslav 13:19, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it's not much of an edit war really, if he likes the image so much I'm cool with it staying, but I don't see the point. It doesn't help illustrate the article at all and I wouldn't consider including an image of this brutal and gruesome act (see Battle of Kleidion) unless we have very strong grounds to do it (and we currently don't). Of course, a history section is needed and the article will really benefit from one. Todor→Bozhinov 13:47, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I offer you the first hurriedly written part of the History section.

History

The lands of present-day Blagoevgrad Province were inhabited from the Prehistory. The first traces from human presence in thе region date from the Neolithic age (6400-4800 BC), when it was part of the main road of neolithization of Europe and one of its earliest centers. More than 40 neolithic settlements have been found predominantly in the valleys of Struma and Mesta until now.

The development of some of these centers continued during the Copper age, when Bulgarian lands were among most advanced in the Prehistoric world. Over 25 settlements from this period have been found so far.

the Bronze Age (3500-1150 BC) is represented from 16 setllements.

The first historic information about the geographical area of which Blagoevgrad Province belongs were given from Homer. According to his Iliad, which describes events from the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron age, this part of the Balkans was inhabited from Thracians. More than 60 towns and villages and 20 strongholds from the Iron age have been found until now. The major part of them were situated around contemporary cities of Sandanski, Petrich and Gotse Delchev. After the information of various ancient writers in the lands of Blagoevgrad Province lived several Thracian tribes: Bessi, Bithyni, Dii (also Dii-Bessi), Maedi and Satrae. The most famous antique historic hero from this region was Spartacus and the most important mythological figure - Orpheus from Rhodope Mountains. The whole region was traditionally considered as part of Thrace from many authors from Hesiod to Herodotus and Thucydides.

Sources:

1. История на България, Том първи, Издателство на БАН, София, 1979.

2. Енциклопедия Пирински край, Том I, Издателство Редакция Енциклопедия, Благоевград, 1995.

3. Кратка енциклопедия Тракийска древност, Издателство Аргес, София, 1993.

4. Хенриета Тодорова, Иван Вайсов, Новокаменната епоха в България, Издателство Наука и изкуство, София, 1993.

Looks good for now, though it may need a little copyediting and possibly inline citations for some of the statements. Sources are nice, but need {{cite book}} formatting. Hope you'd continue with the Middle Ages and later history :) Todor→Bozhinov 17:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Disputed section?

Please, explain me, are there any really disputable points in this section:

Pirin Macedonia

The region is regarded by many of the people living in the Republic of Macedonia as part of an irredentist imaginary state that unites the whole geographical region of Macedonia.

However, these claims are due to the long period of propaganda-like history in the Republic Macedonia.

Today the idea of “united” Macedonia is part of the doctrines only of extremely right-orientated parties and organizations in the Republic of Macedonia. Only a negligible 3,117 of the province's population of 341,245 described themselves as ethnic Macedonians in 2001, Bulgarians being an overwhelming majority of 286,491.

This low number of ethnic Macedonians in the region is explained by supporters of Macedonism as being a result of repression. They also assert that the number of Macedonians in the province was much larger as recorded by the 1948 and 1956 censuses, claiming that then-Stalinist Bulgaria recognised a distinct Macedonian minority and allowed free self-determination (and implying this is not the case today). This is explained by Bulgarians as being part of the Comintern's and the Bulgarian Communist Party's policy of the time, which supported a USSR-backed admission of Bulgaria to Yugoslavia with the corresponding incorporation of Pirin Macedonia into the Macedonian Socialist Republic. With the easing of this trend the idea of promoting a separate national consciousness in Pirin Macedonia lost support.

I think this passage is relatively well sourced with many links to other articles. I can't see any flagrantly inadequate information. Best wishes, Jackanapes 01:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

P. s. I just have read the dispute between Todor Bozhinov and Dan Carkner in their personal talk pages. Maybe it will be better for all of us to continue the discussion here. Jackanapes 02:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I do think that the section could cause many Macedonians (citizens of the republic) to see red because of the way it is phrased; in fact I'm supprised it hasn't been vandalised by anonymous editors with Macedonian IP-addresses yet (-:. It should be rewritten without using the words "imaginary", "propaganda-like", "doctrines", "extremely", "negligible" and "overwhelming", because these words are emotional. "irredentist" may cause offense because many don't know what it means and a fanatic Macedonist may interpret it as negative without consulting the article about it. Preslav 07:47, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear Preslav, I do not think so. I think that it is dangerous illusion to try to satisfy fanatics or extreme nationalists from Republic of Macedonia. My regards to the tolerant citizens of this state, but I'm not sure that any euphemistic softening of the situation, which leads to distortion of macedonian-bulgarian relations, could be reasonable and effective. The official macedonian attitude toward Bulgaria and bulgariannes is still based on propaganda-like antibulgarian doctriines with two basic elements - denial or negativization of bulgarian past (check one example here) and claims for vast ethnic (allegedly oppressed) minority in Pirin Macedonia with accusations about the status of its (allegedly violated) human rights. The conception of "United Macedonia" in its postyugoslav variant in Republic of Macedonia is imaginary, aggressive, extreme and - no doubt - has irredentist origin. Because of this several months ago bulgarian minister of foreign affairs Ivailo Kalfin, supported by the bulgarian pesident Georgi Parvanov, declared that Repulic of Macedonia must stop its aggression against the bulgarian history and nation (check here and here). And this isn't an exception to the rule, we have to bring in our minds long-lived greek-macedonian diplomatic strife about the official name of RoM/FYRoM. I'm afraid macedonian position is defenceless on the ground of history and contemporary statistics. My conclusion is that any kind of extremism must not be treated with tolerance, therefore this article needs historical paragraph, but not euphemistic softening of this macedonian-bulgarian conflict. Best wishes, Jackanapes 10:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

The position of the bulgarian president Georgi Parvanov in Englsh:

Euronews: How about Macedonia? Your foreign minister recently asked Macedonians to stop "aggressing" Bulgaria, do you agree with him?

Georgi Pavanov: Let me remind you first of all that Bulgaria was the first country to recognize Macedonia under its constitutional name. We have always supported Macedonia in its efforts to secure peace and stability. However when it comes to history, and we have a common history, I think there is a line to be drawn beyond which our own history cannot be stolen by anyone else. However I would say that these issues are best left to historians. We should put our efforts together and look ahead towards the future. Let us collaborate in that direction. Bulgaria is making progress already and hopefully in the future Macedonia will also join the European Union. This will be the best solution to the issues which have accumulated over past decades, and which may still be outstanding.

Link

Jackanapes 07:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

For the so called "Macedonians"

You all know deep in your soles that you are Bulgarians. The serbs made you "Macedonians" after they failed to make you serbs. I think that Macedonia should finnaly join Bulgaria. It is better for you, not for us.--Gligan 19:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

The number of the so called ethnic Macedonian minority

According to Stoyko Stoykov, one of the leaders of the non-registered ethnic Macedonian political party OMO "Ilinden" - PIRIN (abbreviation of United Macedonian Organization "Ilinden" - Party for Economic Development and Integration of the population), the present number of the ethnic Macedonians in Pirin Macedonia is between 5,000 and 10,000:

EFA and OMO Ilinden – Pirin at a Press Conference in Brussels

29 November 2006 | 18:27 | BNR

Bulgarian National radio (BNR)’s correspondent to Brussels Diana Chepisheva comments on the press conference organized in Brussels by the European Free Alliance and OMO Ilinden – Pirin

Diana Chepisheva: The only MEP that attended this press conference was Bernard Juan, a Spanish MEP from Catalonia, a member of the group of the Greens in the European Parliament. Upon opning the press conference he stated he would talk on a very sensitive issue – that there is a political party in Bulgaria, OMO Ilinden, that it is directly connected to the European Free Alliance (EFA), but unfortunately it is not recognized legally in Bulgaria, and that they take this as a threat to EFA. Otherwise, Bulgaria is viewed as any other European state and that political parties should be able to take part in the political life everywhere.

Then the floor was taken by the leader of OMO Ilinden – Pirin Stoyko Stoykov. What he decided to underscore upon starting is that the party he represents is a civil and democratic one, but it has been permanently denied legal registration over the years because it was the only party in Bulgaria that defends the rights of the Macedonian minority. Stoyko Stoykov told about the way laws and rules have changed over the years, that before they needed only 50 people to register a party, then the number had grown to 5000, and later to 5,000, which in his words had violated their right of self-declaring and peaceful organization.

Then a series of suggestions followed about the real existence of a Macedonian minority in Bulgaria. And Stoyko Stoykov defined himself as its representative. He even summoned the audience to go and touch him if someone doubts his words. However, there were no people willing to do so.

Another participant in this news conference was the co-chairman of the European Free Alliance Gunther Dauwen. He said he visited Bulgaria in September and that he saw that the official representatives of Bulgaria state that there is no Macedonian minority in Bulgaria. Now, after the debates related to the report by Geoffrey Van Orden and the already well-known amendment, he find it completely clear that official Sofia is persistently defending the thesis that there is no Macedonian minority in Bulgaria. In his words, this was foolish because there is just one problem that must be solved and that the Bulgarian authorities have had the chance to solve over the last 10 years but they haven’t done so, and that is why they should not get offended now that someone stands on the side of this Macedonian minority, whose rights are neglected.

Gunther Dauwen underscored that Stoyko Stoykov is a Bulgarian: “See, he speakes Bulgarian”.

The other thing he pointed out was that Stoyko Stoykov is not a separatist.

The press conference was also attended by lawyer Yonko Grozev from the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee. He distinguished himself clearly, at the very beginning, from all possible political reminiscences. He underlined that he is there only in his quality of a representative of a party that has been denied registration, which something that the European Court on human Rights has defined as violation of the right of association. Yonko Grozev, of course, presented the well-known court decision, but did not take part in any way in the political discussion.

Another thing that I find very interesting and worthy mentioning is that being asked about the number of members of OMO Ilinden, and about the number of the Macedonians in Bulgaria, Stoyki Stoykov said that the membership list of OMO Ilinden reaches about 6,000. Referring to the number of people that define themselves as Macedonians in Bulgaria, he said the no one knows the exact number of these people and it is the government’s fault since during the latest censuses in the country it has categorically denied to give a possibility for such a type of self-definition.

Radio host: You mean that this type of ethnic origin is not included in the list of possibilities, as the options listed are Bulgarian, Turk, Roma, etc.?

Diana Chepisheva: Right. That the option Macedonian is not included. The problem according to Stoykov, originates (according to his judgment and data) from that fact that there are between 5,000 and 10,000 Macedonians, while their number had even reached 187,000 during some periods of the history of Bulgaria.

Radio host: Well, if there are between 5,000 and 10,000 macedonians, and OMO Ilinden has a membership list of 6,000 people, it turns out that more than half of them are members of OMO Ilinden, right?

Diana Chepisheva: Yes, it seems so. In the mean time it was said that it is not only Macedonians that are members of OMO Ilinden and that there were representatives of different ethnoses. However, I would like to add something more about the figure 187,000 Macedonians back in the history. Stoyko Stoykov said that he was speaking about censuses in the period 1946 – 1956. However, nothing was said of course about this part of our history that is related to the forcefully Macedonization recommended by Stalin. Anyway, this was what was stated here.

Asked whether he thinks OMO Ilinden stands the chance, if it gets registered, of overcoming the 4% barrier needed to enter the parliament, Stoykov refused to make some categorical comments and added that this is somethi9gn that must be checked in practice, and that if they cannot overcome this barrier on their own, the world has though of coalitions.

Another thing that I’d like to add is that the co-chairman of the European Free Alliance Gunther Dauwen, asked whether he knows what the ethnic conflicts have caused on the Balkans and who needs another artificial one, he answered that he knows very well the history of the Balkans and that aim of the political formation that he represents is not to cause tension and conflict. The only thing that they would oppose as a European formation is the line of official Sofia according to which there is no Macedonian minority. We are searching for solution, not tension, he stated.

The presence of media representatives was quite symbolic at this press conference. Although it was held in the main press hall of the European Parliament, it was attended by about 10 journalists, most of whom were accredited representatives of Bulgarian media here. There were also about 10 employees of the European Parliament.

Els de Groen was not present, which does not exclude the possibility that she grounds herself on this press conference and reanimate the issue again during the upcoming debate on the Geoffrey Van Orden’s report on Bulgaria before tomorrow’s vote in the plenary hall.

Source. - Jackanapes 02:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Pirin Macedonia is different term then Blagoevrgrad Province

Pirin Macedonia is term which point to the one of the parts of ethnic Macedonia. It is different term then Blagoevgrad Province in Republic of Bulgaria. By the current teritorial subdivisions, Blagoevgrad Province spread almost to the same teritory as Pirin Macedonia. --Brest 08:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC) (copied from Talk:Pirin Macedonia by Preslav 10:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC))

I can't agree with the proposal. "Ethnic Macedonia" (which theory shaped relatively late in the 20th century and borrowed its geographical concept mainly from the older Bulgarian tradition) is only one of the spheres in which the term Pirin Macedonia is used. It is common among the Bulgarians too. For example this name is widely used by Ivan Mihailov, the last leader of the historical IMRO, in his "Memoirs". I can't agre with the following statement also:

By the current teritorial subdivisions, Blagoevgrad Province spread almost to the same teritory as Pirin Macedonia.

The same subdivisional boundaries exist at least from 1959 as it is shown on the map of People's Republic of Bulgaria from 1960, published in Sofia by the state Bureau for geography and cartography, and are similar to those of the so called Petrich Province from the period before 1944. - Jackanapes 11:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

About the subdivisional frontiers. Before 1878 significant portions of Kyustendil Province and Samokov area were considered as parts of Macedonia region. The Treaty of Berlin (1878) fixed new and different situation. The northern boundary of present-day Pirin Macedonia/Blagoevgrad Province generally follows the borderline between Principality/Tsardom Bulgaria (and Eastern Roumelia before 1885) and Ottoman Empire from the period 1878-1912. The eastern border roughly follows the internal Ottoman subdivisional border between Salonica vilayet and Edirne vilayet from the same period. These lines, created by the circumstances but which never existed before that time, laid in the basis of one new concept for "geographic Macedonia", acceped in the Bulgarian tradition, especially this of the revolutionary movement IMRO. They weren't connected with clear natural, etnographic or dialect frontiers.

According to "Bulgarian encyclopaedia" of Danchovi brothers, published in Sofia in 1936, before 1934 existed "Петрички окръг" (Petrichki okryg) or Petrich District with area 6,797 km², which included 5 "околии" (okolii) or smaller areas of Gorna Dzhumaya (nowadays Blagoevgrad), Nevrokop (nowadays Gotse Delchev), Petrich, Razlog and Sveti Vrach (nowadays Sandanski). This structure was established around 1919. After the coup on 19th may 1934 the areas of Gorna Dzhumaya, Petrich and Sveti Vrach were merged in newly created larger "Софийска област" (Sofiiska oblast) or Sofia Region and the remaining two areas of Razlog and Nevrokop - in Plovdiv Region. After 1944 the Communist regime restored pre-1934 boundaries of Petrich District, but shifted its center to Blagoevgrad.

This is the history of the northern and eastern frontiers of Pirin Macedonia in brief. They have nothing to do with the concept of "Ethnic Macedonia", I'm afraid... - Jackanapes 22:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Blagoevgrad province is just the term which should refer to the current territorial subdivision of the Republic of Bulgaria. As you say over the time this region was subdivided at different ways, depends on political governance of the region. Even the names of the places was changed over the time. The most stable term was Pirin Macedonia and the macedonian people there.--Brest 10:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

No, you are wrong again. Pirin Macedonia isn't "the most stable term" because it wasn't very popular before 1944 and was unknown before 1912. Check the older Bulgarian tradition of IMRO for example, there are hundreds of memoirs and documents about this region. In fact it is only one of the terms for Petrich District/Blagoevgrad Province, part of the Serres revolutionary district before 1912. It gained an iconic status in the fictional nationalist and irredentist theory of "Ethnic Macedonia" after 1944, but it didn't reach so hypertrophic degree in the Bulgarian tradition. Your personal POV as Macedonian couldn't be accepted as a general principle, I'm sorry.

It seems I must write the same again. The contemporary subdivisional borders in fact are traditional in Bulgaria. There were several short periods of total 15-20 years of different territorial organization during the whole period between (1913?) 1919 and 2007. Nothing more. It is hard for you as Macedonian to get that, but in fact the concept of "Ethnic Macedonia" as a successor of the older Bulgarian tradition in geographic aspect follows the administrative borders of the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria, not the opposite.

Macedonian people as something stable in the region... But not in the ethnic meaning, dear! In fact significant part of the present population consists of descendants of refugees, who settled in the region after 1913 and 1918. Please, don't speculate in that way.

The conclusion. I'm afraid your understanding of the situation is far away from the history and naming traditions. I can't accept the proposal. - Jackanapes 11:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Cannot see the point of including a 'Pirin Macedonia' section in this article. The name appeared, at the earliest, in the 1930s and was never previously treated as a separate area. We might as well add a 'Phanariot Melenik' section on the grounds that southern half of Blagoevgrad Province was dominated by Phanariots for a while. The information in 'PM' can be absorbed in a (short) history section, within the article - and I am certain former Bulgarian foreign minister Georgi Pirinski would totally agree with this view.Politis 15:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

But nevertheless this name exists both in Bulgarian and Ethnic Macedonian traditions. Also exists its significant role in contemporary Ethnic Macedonian nationalist concept. The article has to inform about that.

Phanariot domination in this region... Hm, this means that another section will appear - about the struggle of the local Bulgarian majority against the Phanariot rule, which rule made continued attemp of assimilation and hellenization of local Slav-speaking population. This struggle ended with almost total defeat of the Greek cause. Could you agree with this? ;-)

According to a relatively unbiased researcher like Vassil Kynchov, "Macedonia. Etnography and statistics", Sofia, 1900, in the end of 19th century in Melnik Kaza there were (I will cite only bigger groups) 2,650 Greeks (concentrated exclusively in the town of Melnik), 16,998 Christian Bulgarians, 5,551 Turks, 28,271 total population (check here). Nevrokop Kaza (present day Gotse Delchev region) in the same time: 620 Muslim (!) Greeks only in the village of Lyalyovo, 35,310 Christian Bulgarians, 26,962 Muslim Bulgarians (as Kynchov names these Slav-speaking Muslims, but he also points out their dominant preference for Turkish self-consciousness), total population 77,645 (check here). Gorna Dzhumaya Kaza (present day Blagoevgrad region): only 60 Greeks in the town of Gorna Dzhumaya, 21,282 Christian Bulgarians, 3,900 Muslim Bulgarians, 4,575 Turks, total population 31,478 (check here). Petrich Kaza: 27,773 Christian Bulgarians, 11,310 Turks, total population 41,088 (check here). Razlog Kaza: 23,100 Christian Bulgarians, 8,870 Muslim Bulgarians, total population 33,350 (check here). The situation to the south was different, for example there were 28,665 Greeks from total population 107,684 in Serres Kaza (check here). Check the map of the Greek population in Macedonia from the same book here. Note - according to Vassil Kynchov not every Slav-speaking follower of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople was ethnic Greek. ;-) It will be interesting to compare this information with Greek statistics and different relatively serious evaluations (by the way, Kynchov cites various Ottoman and other sources in his book).

Of course, the historical Greek ethnic presence and important cultural influence in this region could not be denied or underestimated, but that cultural influence was far more wide than the demographic presence. Your suggestion could be completely suitable part of a future detailed historical section of the article. - Jackanapes 18:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Err, Jackanapes dear friend, sorry about that, I was totally joking about including a 'Phanariot Melenik' section, of course it would be out of order. I just wanted to stress that, in my view, it is as inappropriate to have a monopolistic 'Pirin Macedonia' section as it would be to have a 'Phanariot Melenik' section. This inclusion of a 'PM' section seems liable to be interpreted as an artificial title whose only purpose it to challeng the Bulgarian history of the region. If we have a 'Pirin Macedonia' section, then, why not a 'Western Bulgaria' section in the article on the (FY) Republic of Macedonia? I think it is best to keep things simple. Politis 11:03, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Politis, the name Pirin Macedonia has its Bulgarian tradition. Some examples. Ivan Mihailov's "Memoirs", volume 2, part 2, chapter 13 "The situation in Pirin Macedonia. Auxuliary IMRO"; volume 3, part 3, chapter 17 about the "Petrich incident" in 1925 - the name "Pirin Macedonia" is used; volume 4, chapter 4, named exactly "The situation in Pirin Macedonia". Again Ivan Mihailov's book, "On the thorny road of the Macedonian liberating deed" from 1939, chapter 6 concerns the usage of the name "Macedonia" after the coup in Bulgaria in 1934. Contemporary Bulgarian academic example: "Macedonia. History and political destiny" in 3 volumes, collective of historians, Sofia, 1998, volumes 2 and 3 - "Pirin Macedonia" is widely used. - Jackanapes 18:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Occasional of not?

Ok no problem, I will leave it as it is. Also, as far as I can tell the term was first introduced in the 1920 or 1930s. Will check out my sources. Politis 19:23, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

The use of the name "Pirin Macedonia" isn't occasional as Bulgarian tradition. What Google says: 13,100 results for "пиринска македония" (Pirin Macedonia) globally, 12,300 in sites in Bulgarian language and 10,100 in Bulgarian sites. Note - there are 11,500 for "Vardar Macedonia" and 10,500 for "Aegean Macedonia" for comparison. - Jackanapes 22:27, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

RE; pirin macedonians

can remove the automatic redirect when you search 'pirin macedonians'. there is an actual article pirin macedoniansP m kocovski (talk) 21:48, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The Macedonist propaganda was removed and there is absolutely no way to add it again.

Since less than 1% of the population in the municipality declares Macedonian ethnic self-determination there is absolutely no reason this group of people to be mentioned in a separate paragraph.Sorry to disappoint the Macedonists but there are 2 bigger minorities than the so called Macedonian, so mentioning the presence of Macedonians and their number is more than enough.Furthermore, even to the boldest estimates of the leader of the OMO, the people calling themselves Macedonians are between 1.5% and 3%. --BulgarianPatriot (talk)

Once again, please stop reverting "information" which is obviously biased and doesn`t correspond to the requirement for NPOW.If you want to add something about the people with Macedonian national sense then do it in "Demographics".The previous version was imposing ideology of Macedonism which obviously is accepted by a very small share of the residents.Furthermore, this region is one of the biggest educational centers in Bulgaria and there are many foreign students, including from Vardar Macedonia which means that the number of the people who were born in Bulgaria is even smaller.Whether you like it or not, it`s from no importance.Just add once again the propagandist text and I`ll contact the admins or probably I should add very detailed information in the article for every single Macedonian municipality about the number of the people who applied for BG citizenship and signed declaration for Bulgarian self-identity. --BulgarianPatriot (talk) 07:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, actually it's an admin who likes it as it is. It's much better than having an ultranationalistic irredentist article like Pirin Macedonia. You just won't believe what they had written. Btw if you can provide more info on Bulgarian citizens in RoM, you can go to Bulgarians in the Republic of Macedonia - it is in desperate need of attention since I don't have the time cause of the constant POV pushers around here. --Laveol ^T 16:27, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, for a 3rd and let`s hope last time- Why do you keep reverting the Macedonist propaganda?There is a separate article for the so called Macedonians in Bulgaria and there is absolutely no need to copy the whole text.This article concerns the Blagoevgrad region itself, not the attempts of some people to build their nation.Those who express ethnic self-determination as the citizens of the Former Jugoslav Republic of Macedonia are less than 1% of the total population and represent neither the first, nor the second, nor the third but the fourth biggest ethnic group.Consequently there is a total lack of arguements for the presence of nationalist material.This article is intended to inform about the economic, politcal, historical, cultural and demographical specifics of the region, not to impose a certain viewpoint.--BulgarianPatriot (talk) 14:53, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm reverting you again because I (and a few others) think it is worth mentioning the different points of view on ethnic Macedonians in Bulgaria, which are related to this province. Their share of the total population is a matter of dispute, and that there is a dispute is the main reason for mentioning this ethnicity and not the others in the province. You are right that there is a separate article on this matter, but the text here is only a brief (maybe not brief enough) summary of that article, and quite well-balanced in my opinion. Preslav (talk) 16:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

It`s a matter of dispuite, really?According to official Skopie there are 2.2-2,5m ethnic Macedonians in Bulgaria.According to official Sofia there are approximately 1.5m-1.8m Bulgarians with pre-dominant family origin from the region of Macedonia.Do you really believe that between 1.5m and 2.5m people(20%-35% of the total population!) are suppressed by the Bulgarian authorities and can`t express their Macedonian self-identity?As one of those presumable ethnic Macedonians, I feel extremely offended by the Macedonist propaganda.Even the political leader of the alledged ethnic Macedonians in Bulgaria says that their real number in Blagoevrad region is at most 5.000-10.000.So, even if we accept the most optimistic estimation for the number of the ethnic Macedonians they are less than 3% of the population and remain less numerous than Bulgarians, Turks and Gypsies.Why then do they deserve so much attention?If you check the history of Republic of Macedonia you will find out that this country had never existed till 1944-1945 and all their heroes and kings were Bulgarians and in the Middle Ages the one and only name of the state was Bulgaria.Till the establishment of the Macedonian state not just the Bulgarians but everybody else used to consider these population as Bulgarian.Even they themselves registered in the censuses of the Ottoman Empire as such.In 1874 there was a referendum which church do the locals want to join and it was de facto official census.The options were- 1) establishment of local Macedonian church, 2)to remain part of the Constantinopole(Greek) patriarchate, 3)to join the Serbian church, 4)to join the Bulgarian exarchate.Do you know what were the results?The votes in favour of the Bulgarian exarchate were 97% in the Southern parts and 91% in the Northern parts of what is now Macedonia...
And the number of the minorities is issue not just in Bulgaria but in Macedonia as well.Since the fall of the communism more than 80.000 Macedonians signed declaration for BG self-determination and applied for citizenship.Nevertheless, according to the Macedonian authorities there are only 1,400 Bulgarians in the country...Taking into consideration the impudence of the Macedonists to spread their propaganda, I`think that it`ll will be quite fair if in each article for adminsitrative region of Macedonia 30%-40% of the information is about the local Bulgarian minority.And in contrast to the millions of presumable Macedonians in Bulgaria, the Bulgarians in Macedonia are officially documented with their personal signatures.So, after 0.07% of the population in Bulgaria deserves so much attention then what should we do with 4% Bulgarians in Macedonian?

--BulgarianPatriot (talk) 09:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Removal of relevant information

Please refrain from removing relevant information, even if the information is not to your liking. Two times in the last 24 hours, User:Pensionero has removed information about the ethnic composition of Blagoevgrad Province, more precisely by removing the entry about ethnic Macedonians (and grouping them into "others"). For people who are mainly using Wikipedia to get information (and not to promote their own ideas), this kind of information is definitely relevant. The argument "in any other Bulgarian province in ethnic groups of the minorities are showed only turks and roma" is not valid for several reasons. 1: It is not true, since even more detailed information is given for Varna (Armenians, Russians and several others). 2: Even if it was true, that would not be a reason for not mentioning it here, as long as it is relevant information. 3: It is especially relevant to mention the ethnic Macedonians in this context, since the province of Blagoevgrad is in part coinciding with what is called Pirin Macedonia, and it is therefore of interest to see how many (or how few) there are who self-identify as ethnic Macedonians. 4: As the source will show, the ethnic Macedonians in Blagoevgrad Province are the largest percentage of other ethnic groups than Bulgarians, Turks and Roma in any of the provinces of Bulgaria. And lastly: Please use the Talk page for discussions. This talk page has not been used for a long time. It is better to resolve disagreements here than to make endless edit wars - better for the ordinary user of Wikipedia, that is. Regards 79.160.40.10 (talk) 19:36, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree. There is no reason to remove ethnic Macedonians from the list, as the precedent you have found with Varna Province shows. I also concur that ethnic Macedonians are relevant to this province of Bulgaria. Pensionero's edits have been getting increasingly nationalist... — Toдor Boжinov — 21:09, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Blagoevgrad Province. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110719192055/http://focus-news.net/?id=n1178958 to http://focus-news.net/?id=n1178958
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090206075601/http://tourism.government.bg:80/files/politics/file_173_bg.doc to http://www.tourism.government.bg/files/politics/file_173_bg.doc

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Blagoevgrad Province. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6Fdhrysbu?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nsi.bg%2FORPDOCS%2FCensus2011_4.pop_by_ethnos.xls to http://www.nsi.bg/ORPDOCS/Census2011_4.pop_by_ethnos.xls
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060615180726/http://www.bl.government.bg/bl/index.html to http://www.bl.government.bg/bl/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:11, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Blagoevgrad Province. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://censusresults.nsi.bg/Reports/2/2/R1.aspx?OBL=BLG
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719192055/http://focus-news.net/?id=n1178958 to http://focus-news.net/?id=n1178958
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090206075601/http://www.tourism.government.bg/files/politics/file_173_bg.doc to http://www.tourism.government.bg/files/politics/file_173_bg.doc
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150522063719/http://www.monitor.bg/article?id=143536 to http://www.monitor.bg/article?id=143536
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.bnr.bg/RadioBulgaria/Emission_Bulgarian/Theme_Muzika/Material/mac.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714103411/http://www.nsi.bg/census2011/pagebg2.php?p2=36&sp2=37&SSPP2=39 to http://www.nsi.bg/census2011/pagebg2.php?p2=36&sp2=37&SSPP2=39
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110408064700/http://www.nsi.bg/census2011/pagebg2.php?p2=36&sp2=37&SSPP2=43 to http://www.nsi.bg/census2011/pagebg2.php?p2=36&sp2=37&SSPP2=43
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://censusresults.nsi.bg/Reports/2/2/R9.aspx?OBL=BLG
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.rilanationalpark.org/bg/index.phtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101127041113/http://www.blagoevgrad.org/ to http://www.blagoevgrad.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:29, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Flag of Blagoevgrad.gif

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:24, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Issues with new content

Hello VMORO. There are some issues with the content you recently introduced in the Ethnic groups sub-section. The content in the first paragraph appears to be mostly off topic. The topic of the article is definitely the Blagoevgrad Province, not what most Slavs had identified as in the region of Macedonia. The claim that the UMO Ilinden-Pirin is separatist and foreign-funded is not reliably sourced. It requires better sourcing than Bulgarian media sources and VMRO-BND claims. There also isn't adequate sourcing for the claim that the then Republic of Macedonia consistently made claims against the Bulgarian population, but it's true that this was happening during VMRO-DPMNE's rule. However, on Wikipedia we cannot introduce content just because we know it to be true, we have to provide reliable sources too. It also needs to be within the scope of the article. Content about what was happening in the Blagoevgrad Province during the communist period could be added in the "History" section, but within scope and with due weight. It's not really due to include much content about a pretty tiny part of Bulgaria's population, as some have already pointed out here. Also, I'm wondering if Stojko Stojkov's claim (while not new content) is really necessary here. StephenMacky1 (talk) 22:44, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi Steve! I understand your point. However, how "in scope" is it really to constantly add content to such articles that - in the lack of actual evidence - is supposed to sow seeds of doubt, introduce a narrative, make you wonder if there is perhaps some truth to the "Macedonian" side of things. Why is the topic "ethnic Macedonians" even discussed in this article? There have a number of censuses since 1990, and the number of ethnic Macedonians in the country - minus naturalized one - is very obviously close to zero. There were indeed some 10-15,000 people with Communist persuasions who took the Macedonist idea to heart in the late 40s. But they're dead now - because of age, not because we killed them. There was indeed one census - in 1946 - where people were forced to say they were Macedonians (this is very well documented), which was repeated in 1956 under pressure from the Soviet Union as they wanted to thaw relations with Yugoslavia (yes, I have a source for that), but that's it. So, no, the situation with the number of ethnic Macedonians is NOT complicated, as the previous text said. There is one and only one reason why this continues, and its name is irrendentism. It is not true that former Yugoslavia and then independent North Macedonia have stopped making claims towards the region or its population. If it was, then there wouldn't be the constant allegations of oppressed Macedonians, 200,000, 300,000, 700,000, the claims that the dialects spoken here are Macedonian, etc. etc.

The same thing concerns OMO Ilinden Pirin. It is a fake party with no members and no actual structures, whose only way to convey the idea of the hundreds of thousands of opressed Macedonians is through constant litigation. Yes, it did have some members and structures in 1990s, when that older generation was still alive, and it even polled 3,000 votes in one local election when it was allowed to run. But now? Why is it discussed in any article? Why is it relevant to discuss it in this article - about a Bulgarian province? If it actually had any support among the population, believe me, everyone would have felt it. And don't point fingers at me about sources. The same sources and the same claims were in the previous text, I just borrowed them.

Again, what is the relevance of Stoyko Stoykov? Why is he relevant and the Bulgarian media and VMRO-BND not relevant? VMRO-BND at least had a major presence in the province in the 2000s and 2010s, and even now, it has the largest number of city council members in the municipality of Blagoevgrad. But what makes Stoyko Stoykov relevant? That he says things that sound like music to Macedonian ears?

I dispute that what I wrote is not relevant to the article. Vardar Macedonia went on a different path after 1944 - and good luck with that - but Pirin Macedonia stayed on the same one. You had a nation-building process - and good for you - but Bulgarian Macedonians didn't. I don't understand why the people in North Macedonia cannot understand this, but as long as you (not you personally, generally speaking) continue to claim that everything in georgaphical Macedonia is ethnic Macedonian, then we'll have to point out the same things over and over again.

And to finish with something funny: Kiril Despodov, who has been voted footballer of the year several times now and who is from Kresna, has so far had to make formal statements on three separate occasions that he is not Macedonian. Because your press keeps writing "our boy", "the Macedonian footballer", etc. etc. This is so bizarre and would be so so funny if it weren't so annoying. And the same thing happens pretty much everywhere and about everything. VMORO 01:11, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

I can suggest you something else: erasing the whole section, keeping the statements that they have a regional Macedonian identity (although after the last couple of years, it is really on the way of dying out, but never mind), that this, however, is not an ethnic Macedonian identity, and then to give the number of ethnic Macedonians according to the census. Just dry facts without much politics that unnecessarily annoys any of the sides. I think that neither what I wrote, nor the previous text is appropriate for this particular article. If you don't agree, please tell me what you suggest. VMORO 22:26, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

I have no objections. Thank you. StephenMacky1 (talk) 05:40, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

VMORO, I was busy with exams before, but I already responded here that I have no objections with the newest content. Thanks. StephenMacky1 (talk) 14:59, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay, my oversight then🙂. Thanks, Steve!VMORO 16:13, 30 November 2023 (UTC)