Talk:Antartiko

Untitled

A historical name is only to be used when the article is in a historical context. This article spans the whole history of the place: "but throughout the 20th century as the village lost inhabitants due to immigration it is almost certainly primarily Greek". Therefore, the present local name is to be used as the title of the article. Andreas ^(T) 18:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

South slavic?

Why should it be referred to as South slavic? The only people who use the word zhelevo, are Ethnic Macedonians (slav Macedonians) so it should say Ethnic Macedonian: Zhelevo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Makedonia (talk • contribs) 12:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its south slavic.Revert it.Megistias (talk) 12:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it is Bulgarian. (Since the term ethnic "Macedonian" was invented in recent years). We use South Slavic though. Seleukosa (talk) 18:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Misreading sources

The source could not be more clear about people in this village being bilingual. I really don't know what is there to argue about.--King of Fluid (talk) 14:25, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And another thing, the mentioning of a Macedonian language school is sourced to the personal narrative of an ex-partisan, as being quoted by a newspaper in the Republic of Macedonia. The newspaper article itself makes no evaluation on this, and in any case newspapers are reliable enough for reporting trivial and recent stuff, that is, as primary sources. Generally, we should leave historical factoids as this one being confirmed by more authoritative sources, which can also provide more context. --King of Fluid (talk) 21:00, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed that it's a transfer from a book, what are the credentials of the writers: Jacquelina Mitevska and Tashko Jovanov ? What is this book exactly, does it represent a scientific work or is it just a "report on reports" ?--King of Fluid (talk) 21:16, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting that the authors are not qualified to simply mention that there was a Macedonian school operating in the village. You are aware that during the Greek Civil War era that over 100 Macedonian language schools operated in Greece, with a student body over 10,000, aren't you? Lunch for Two (talk) 02:15, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The existence of the school is plausible, but we still need a reliable source to establish verifiability and due weight, and possibly to add some contextual connection to this sentence as well. Please don't evade my questions with generalizations that only point to original research. Do the authors and the publishing house have any scientific merit ? Cause i could just as well ask you, why should we add something in an encyclopedic article just because a retired partisan said it. Also, have you got any comment about my remarks on the bilingualism of the inhabitants ?--King of Fluid (talk) 02:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How much context do you want? Ethnic Macedonians in the village formed a school in order to teach their children their mother language. In regards to the bilingualism, the same people, when approached 40/50 years later were all still speaking their (native) Macedonian language. Lunch for Two (talk) 07:37, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please explain what this book is, for using it you must have some idea of its quality as a source, explain your idea here, authors, publishing house, contents etc, how can i be more clear ? The sentence seems to have been spewed here as a marker of something, do you know how many Greek sources i can find about how it got its name, the notable people that fought in the Macedonian struggle etc ? but i don't like using sources that follow any country's patriotic/heroic perspective. If we had a good source we could explain the evolving situation in which this school appeared, simply stating that there was a school functioning there for a year is not worthy enough, like it's a self-confirming historical "landmark" or something.

In 1993 the people according to the source where largely if not entirely bilingual, that is, they had two first languages. So how about "Macedonian Slavic is still being spoken there, along with Greek" ? what the source actually describes.--King of Fluid (talk) 14:25, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And btw, the contextual synthesis you are more or less sketching, of this school being simply established as a "natural" choice of some sort is exactly what i want to avoid this sentence implying. With this you are only applying the weights of your patriotic narration. Not overlooking the fact that an uninvolved reader will probably not even catch this implied over-simplification and will possibly wonder. The historical reality was much more perplexed, as it is elaborated by our articles on the subject, if this village and this short-lived school was a special case of some kind or have been noted for whatever reason i will like to see a reliable source saying so.--King of Fluid (talk) 18:29, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What name are you talking about? It got a Greek name in the 1920s, I dont see what the issue is with this. As for the school you're doing nothing more than nitpicking and overcomplicating things. What is this "implied over-simplification" you are talking about? Lunch for Two (talk) 12:27, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're not listening, forget about the rest of my commentary and its nuances and just focus on what i'm asking you for a start. I'm basically saying that the first source you use is at least obscure when it comes to WP:RS and that you're misrepresenting the second source. The newspaper article is quoting an interview from a civil war partisan, i have established so far that it is a passage from a book, but i have repeatedly asked you to give the necessary info that would prove this book's reliability as source of content here and provide the way to understand in what context this mentioning happens. The second source is just reporting the linguistic situation in this village in 1993, it says nothing about "exclusivity", whatever that means, it clearly describes the inhabitants as bilingual. Can you address those two ?--King of Fluid (talk) 15:11, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The second source clearly states that the entire population of the village is comprised of Macedonian langauge speakers. They also speak Greek obviously, but are differentiated from other villages where there are exclusive or mixed Pontic Greek, Aromanian or Albanian speaking populations.Lunch for Two (talk) 15:08, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So your "exclusivity" refers to this differentiation, which is obviously needed inside the text of this study as it deals with a number of villages, not just Antartiko. Where does "Macedonian Slavic is still being spoken there, along with Greek" that i proposed contradicts the source ? Are you suggesting that this sentence implies there are also other minority languages spoken in the village, like Pontic, Aromanian, etc ? We are not making a comparative study here like the source does, we are only interested in what the source has to say about Antartiko and to represent it as clearly as possible in the article's content. On the other hand by saying that "the population was exclusively Macedonian speaking" can clearly imply that they speak no other first language, which is not what the study claims. I'm still waiting for that info on the first source, the partisan interview and all. Thanks.--King of Fluid (talk) 19:28, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your sources are superficial --Notesenses (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain. Or is it just that you personally do not like what is written in the sources? Lunch for Two (talk) 15:42, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are not following Wikipedia policies : You have to read this: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources --Notesenses (talk) 15:55, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Original text

The sourced text in French states that "La langue minoritaire est utilisée par des personnes de plus de 30 ans, en public et en privé." The language in the grid is marked with 'S', which, according to the academic expert which Local Hero tried to quote, means 'Slavophone'. Politis (talk) 21:39, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The linguistic group in the village is 'S' which, as you stated, indicates Slavophones. To the right of that column in that same chart is 'M2', which indicates that the language spoken is Macedonian and that it is spoken mostly by those over the age of 30 in public and private. --Local hero ^talk 23:35, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]