Talk:Gligor Sokolović

Disputed neutrality

This man was born in Bulgarian family and initially was involved in the pro-Bulgarian struggle for Macedonia on the side of Supreme Macedonian Committee and subsequently of IMARO. Later, after the fail of the Ilinden Uprising he turned to Serbian Chetnik movement and was involved in the pro-Serbian struggle, i.e. he was not originally a Serb, but became subsequently Serboman. Even a folk-song Песен за Григор Соколович was created on this occasion. It was collected in the early 20th century by the ethnographer Marko Cepenkov and the text reads:

Глигоре, синко Глигоре,

Глигоре, бог да те убие,

що голем срам ни донесе

откога ти се посърби...

Нели сме ние бугари

од две иляди години,

се бугарски зборуваме,

никой сръбски не знаиме

и сам ти сръбски не знаиш

каков сърбин ти ке бидиш?

Rough translation in English:

Gligor, son Gligor,

Gligor, God to kill you,

Are you not ashamed,

since when did you serbianise yourself...

We all are right Bulgarians

since two thousand years,

We speak only Bulgarian,

and nobody from us knows Serbian language

and you yourself also do not speak Serbian

What for a Serb do you are?

Jingiby (talk) 13:11, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

A folk song (about people who are Bulgarians for 2,000 years?) is not a source which could be used as the basis for disputing a neutrality of any article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:09, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

All Bulgarian sources, as primary as well as secondary claim Socolovic was Bulgarian who later turned to a Serbian, or simply Serboman.

↑ Николов, Борис Й. Вътрешна македоно-одринска революционна организация. Войводи и ръководители (1893-1934). Биографично-библиографски справочник, София, 2001, стр. 152.

↑ сп. „Македония“, бр.1, март 1903 г., стр.21-22

↑ сп. „Македония“, бр.3, май 1903 г., стр.28

↑ Кръстю Лазаров, Спомени

↑ Христо Силянов, Освободителните борби на Македония, Том II, стр.290

↑ Известия на Института за българска литература. Т. 7, 1958, стр. 359.

↑ Матов, Милан. За премълчаното в историята на ВМРО, София 2007, с. 306-308.

@Jingiby: Prominent members of IMARO like Матов Милан, Крсто Лазаров and Христо Сиљанов are not reliable source for attributing the ethnicity to Slavic population of Macedonia.

Serbian or Macedonian ethnicity of Slavs of Macedonia is disputed by some Bulgarian authors for more than a century. Many Bulgarian authors claim that Slavs from Macedonia are in fact Bulgarians. Some authors even deny the right of Slavs from Macedonia to declare their own ethnicity other than Bulgarian. They pejoratively refer to those who declare themselves as Serbs or Macedonians as Serbomans. One could use such sources to dispute neutrality of all articles about any Slav from Macedonia who don't declare themselves as Bulgarian. That would not be constructive.

Maybe you did not see a very polite comment written by the major contributor to this article: I have low to nothing knowledge of the Bulgarian language). I would be very thankful if you would add everything you can about his time in the SMAC and IMARO

The purpose of POV tag is not to be a badge of shame but to attract users to resolve POV issue article might have. If you believe there are sources written on Bulgarian language which presents different POV then add such POV using those sources. You can not expect other users to do it instead of you, especially if other user politely asked you for help because he don't know a Bulgarian language. Note: Please don't use IMARO members as sources but only secondary sources written by neutral contemporary scholars. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:31, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Please stop the biased edits. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 05:45, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Your edit to the article is clearly biased, given the emphasis on SMAC and IMRO, even though he undoubtedly had his height of military career in the Chetniks (Great Voivod), and the fact that a significant part of the Serb Chetniks, as well as some Greeks and Vlachs, were prior to their own formation part of the two Bulgarian organizations [before their increasing nationalism] in order to free the territory of Macedonia. Apart from a confusing intro, and bad english, you've not yet added any real information.--Zoupan 06:08, 16 April 2012 (UTC) Blocked sock:Ajdebre.

You are free to edid the intro, but not simply to trevert it. Keep in mind that in the initial stages of the strrugle SMAC and SMARO were much more nationalistic, then after 1902. Just the new statute from 1902 allowed non-Bulgarians to be members of SMARO. Also the truth is somewhere in between. Jingiby (talk) 09:21, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

No real answer. Fixing the lead to neutral, since he obviosly left the Bulgarian organizations, and not vice versa.--Zoupan 21:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC) Blocked sock:Ajdebre. Blocked sock:Ajdebre.

Krakov

Stanislav Krakov, the main source of the article, was the nephew of Nazi collaborator Milan Nedic. During WWII he was the editor-in-chief of the Belgrade-based collaborationist newspaper Obnova, which actively promoted anti-Jewish propaganda. Until the rise of nationalism in Yugoslavia his works were also banned[1]. That being said many of the details quoted from his work can't be regarded as encyclopedic information. He doesn't pass RS, but a POV tag doesn't automatically rewrite the article.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 09:55, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

I think that you failed to justify POV tag.

1. Being a nephew of Nazi collaborators does not mean that Krakov is not reliable.
2. Link Obnova leads to empty page.
3. The link you provided explains that his work was banned during communism and "received amnesty" when "liberal times were coming"

If you don't present valid arguments for POV tag within reasonable period of time it should be removed. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:10, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

This is extremly biased POV based only on Serbian nationalistic sources. Krakov was also editor of the Fascist Novo Vreme of Belgrade. Jingiby (talk) 15:43, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I've already told you to add sources. The fact is that the primary sources, whether Bulgarian or Serbian, are somewhat "nationalistic" in the eye of the beholder. The same with the Bulgarian sources you've presented above. Krakov has unique insight in the history of the Serbian Chetnik Movement, and I do not doubt that your Bulgarian sources may present interesting data as well, but not near as much as Krakov. And where is this extremely biased POV exactly in the article? --Zoupan 15:59, 15 April 2012 (UTC) Blocked sock:Ajdebre.