Talk:Greece/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Greece. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Clarification

Authenticity check: A search reveals that the phrase "regarded by many" appears in the text. Is the phrase a symptom of a dubious statement? Could a source be quoted instead? Perhaps the "many" could be identified? Might text be edited to more genuinely reflect specific facts?
—Wetman

I did not find this phrase, probably deleted in the meantime Andreas ^(T) 22:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Domestic Terrorism

Weasel wording such as unattributed "there are many who believe" statements are not allowed in Wikipedia [[1]].

Small talk

=1

HELLAS

1

- What happened to all the culture that Greeks have stolen from Albania? Music? - What happened to all the Albanian population that is living in Greece? Arvaties, Cham, imigrant Albanians, and the so called ethnic Greeks from Albania? who in real life are Albanians. - What happened to all the land Greeks have taken from Cham Albania and Macedonia which you people modified and make it look yours? Does the words Çameria remind you people of something?86.124.28.175 12:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

2

I agree, Greece is nothing but a conglomeration of many peoples and lands - the Great powers handed them vast territories that belong to Albania, Macedonia and Turkey. When greece was independent, the very term "greek" did not even exist - those inhabitants that were brainwashed into thinking their greeks were actually Albanians, Turks, Vlachs, Romany, and Arabs. As Greek imperialists expanded this so-called "democracy", they conqured Macedonian lands and now have over 1 million Macedonians in Aegean Macedonia occupied by the Fascist Greek Government.

3 (Answer)

The most dangerous propaganda is the propaganda of ignorance and this goes to both users above. The problem is, many nationals in the Balkans have an inferiority syndrome over Greece and reminds me of the inferiority syndrome many nationals (including Greeks) have over the United States. This is acceptable in societies to the point that generalized remarks like "Greece is nothing but a conglomeration of many peoples and lands", "Greeks have stolen from Albania" or "what do Encient Greeks have in common with Modern Greeks" etc. are not made.

It's like Chemistry being taught by an English Language teacher (people state remarks without having any knowledge on the subject). The same goes with remarks like "ALL Americans are stupid", "ALL Americans are murderers" etc. etc. just because someone watched a movie or because he judjes all Americans by the acts of their Government. Please lets get serious. Talk about things you know, not about things that just happen to make you feel better

Especialy about the Macedonia matter it's a very long talk and history does not lie [and in this particular case it's written by the winners, except that Scopjians (FYROM nationals) recognize the same winners (!) as their herittage too...] -- kompikos 3:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

4 (Answer)

This kind of indiscriminate nationalistic rhetoric is not helpful. Like in many other places in the world, Greek society has absorbed and assimilated other cultures over the centuries, partly by peaceful and partly by violent means. At the beginning of the 20th century, with the advent of nationalism and the linguistic definition of ethnicity, Greece has acquired territories inhabited mainly by non-Greek speaking populations, but other nations have acquired or retained territories inhabited mainly by Greeks. All this is amply documented in Wikipedia and otherwise. And yes, Greece had at least two episodes of Fascist (or similar) rule. Also, ignorance about some aspects of history is present in today's society, Greek or other. Wikipedia may be a means to improve this situation if editors make an effort to provide information in an impartial and objective way.
- 'When Greece was independent, the very term "greek" did not even exist': of course the term existed, we all know that Greek culture once had been one of the most important in the world. In the 19th century, the Western word "Greek" was considered equivalent to "Hellenic", whereas Greeks called themselves either "Romans" (Romii), or, the more educated ones, "Hellenes" (Ellines). This could refer either to the mother tongue, Greek, or to the membership in the Greek orthodox church. In this sense, many Albanian, Aromaninan, and Slav-Macedonian speaking people regarded themselves as Greek (Romii). Andreas ^(T) 16:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  - In the case of Macedonia, Greeks favoured a religious definition of ethnicity, whereas Bulgarians and Slav-Macedonians favoured a linguistically defined definition. Andreas ^(T) 20:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Length of article

I think this article is getting too long -- especially the History section. The information there should, I think, be in the more specific sub-articles, e.g. History of Greece etc. What do others think? --Macrakis 17:11, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely. I suggest moving a lot of the detailed material here into the appropriate sub-articles per Wikipedia:Summary style. Jkelly 17:15, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Further, Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countries#Sections gives us a guide as to what sections should and should not be present. Jkelly 17:35, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, all these sections seem to loose themselves under a variety of rabmling entries. All seems too wooly. Key issues should include the role of certain sections of the Greek media in running the country (a seemingly tabboo subject in Greece); corruption (Greece is rated as one of the most corrupt in the west); demography (Greece has one of the lowest population growth rates in the world - occasionally dropping), the impact of the Diaspora; the country's defence budget (4.5% of GDP!); the country's positive impact in southeast Europe (top investor and hosting foreign workforce)... kai ta loipa, kai ta loipa...Politis 17:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:No original research. Jkelly 17:35, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

In the 19th century, Greece, Serbia, and Bulgaria freed themselves from the Turkish rule and actively become conspiring against the Macedonians displaying territorial aspirations on their land. These indigenous states all became in different ways stalking horses for the aspirations of the European Great Powers. The so-called "Macedonian Question" appeared which is nothing else but a competition for a new conquest of Macedonia by their neighbors. The Greeks, Bulgarians, and Serbs employed many weapons in this conflict. They included the opening of schools in an attempt to inculcate a particular linguistic and confessional identity, the control of ecclesiastical office, influence over the course of railway building, diplomatic attempts to secure the ear of the Turkish Sultan. The Greeks and the Bulgarians begun sending guerrilla bands into Macedonia to and use terror to "convince" the population of its "true identity". But the Macedonians strove to develop their own national consciousness and begun organizing themselves for fight against the Turks at the same time, a process that their neighbors tried everything to interrupt. Thus, the nineteenth century is a period of growing national awareness among the Macedonian people and their quest for free and independent Macedonia.

86.122.29.12 17:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Lack of references

Well, we don;t need any original research to see the corruption and nationalism of Greeks. Just look at the way the pages are written: no proper references, classic nationalistic POV, refusal to accept the correct official data.... Basically, the WHOLE PAGE IS A DISGRACE—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.202.17.70 (talk • contribs)
- You really have a big problem with Greeks... Honestly I can't understand why! Where ru from? Let me guess somewhere in the Balkans? You know what mate? Just get over it and accept the fact that with the way and language that you are trying to put forward your arguments will never be heard by anyone serious...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.74.92.255 (talk • contribs)

In this article Salonica is mentioned as part of so called Greece in the Byzantine period. First of all the southern part of Macedonia was not apart of Greece at that time so I don't understand why the city is mentioned. When you talk about world war I you forgot to mention how Greece took over the southern part of Macedonia and changed everything that was Macedonian into Greek including the first and last names of the people. A lot of the people that were brought from Turkey were placed in the homes of the Macedonians who left the southern part of Macedonia in search for freedom. The same people to this day are not allowed to enter todays so called Greece. This is a fact.
- True, but Greece did not exist per se, during the Byzantine Period (nor did any other nation: the concept of "nations" only dates from the 18th c.) The region of Macedonia was a Byzantine thema (province) though. Also, the southern part of the Macedonian region was Greek prior to WWI, a fact that you can verify by opening a history book. Please try to avoid posting inaccurate information.
- To what Macedonia exactly are you refering too?? Because if you mean the country today recognized as the Republic of Macedonia, I'm sad to inform you that at the Byzantine period neither the country nor the Slavic tribes that moved there on the 4th century A.C. existed. Today these people are who call themselves Macedonians. The only Macedonians that existed before, during and after the Byzantine rule, where the mainly Greek-speaking inhabitans of the Byzantine thema (province). Those people spoke Byzantine-Greek which is an evolved form of Hellenistic-Greek, which is an evolved form of Macedonian-Greek, which is a mix of Classical Greek and the Macedonian (doric or cyrilic) dialect. Why people tend to disturb EVERYTHING in recorded history ??(and it is NOT recorded by Greeks either) -- kompikos

Demographics of Greece must include Greeks

This Demographics in the Greece article are Fabricated, some person/s insist on removing ethnic greeks from the Demographics of Greece. Here is what the article states at present

Estimates regarding the ethnic makeup of Greece vary widely; immigrants who are not ethnic Greeks make up somewhere between 2% [5] and 8.5% [6] of the country's residents. Immigrants who are ethnic Greeks may make up about 2% of the population. The main minorites include Turks, Macedonian Slavs, Pomaks, and various Roma groups. A number of religious minorities exist, including the Muslim minority in western Thrace, which makes up about a third of that region's population.

Firstly the estimates regarding the ethnic makeup of Greece do NOT vary widley at all, all contemporary encyclopedias and statistics show a similar result, according to the CIA World Factbook 2006 Greece's demographics are Greek 98%, other 2% [2].

immigrants who are not ethnic Greeks make up somewhere between 2% [5] and 8.5% [6] of the country's residents

Secondly immigrants who are not ethnic Greeks DO NOT make up somewhere between 2% [5] and 8.5% [6] of the country's residents, if the individual who quoted this actually bothered to read the statistics properly, they would've seen that the CIA World Factbook on Greece states [3] that the Net migration rate is 2.34 migrant(s) PER 1,000 population, not 2% - 8% of the countires population. Struscle 06:07, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

SO NOW THERE ARE NO NON-GREEK IMMIGRANTS IN GREECE? THIS IS THE USUAL GREEK RACIST AND NATIONALISTIC CRAP. THERE ARE 8% NON-GREEK IMMIGRANTS IN GREECE, AND THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH NET MIGRATION RATES. I SUGGEST YOU PUT THE PAGE BACK AS IT WAS.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.202.26.243 (talk • contribs) .

The Greek Government has been supressing its minorities for years. There are around 1 million Albanians, 1 million Macedonians and probably another million Turks, Vlachs and Romani in Greece. Of course "official" statistics do not record this because Greece is a racist state which has come under the scrutiny of the European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and a load of other international Orgnisations.

I still can't believe that you guys think that the very blood of pericles runs through your veins - your nothing but a mixture of Slavs, Albanians and Turks. Wikipedia is a joke publishing the propaganda espoused by these Greek terrorists

Please adopt a much more civil tone here at Wikipedia. Jkelly 03:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

A civil tone is not appropriate for liars and cheats. There are NOT, REPEAT NOT, 98% Greeks in Greece, so just stop this crap. The American datasource is not reliable and you should use Greek state data. Of course, we all know the real reason Greeks here want to use the CIA Factbook -- because it suits their nationalistic POV.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.202.26.243 (talk • contribs) .

If you would like to contribute to Wikipedia, being civil is mandatory. In the future, refrain from name-calling and accusations. Jkelly 15:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

User Jkelly is incapable of behaving responsibly and has removed the correct edit of another user. THe LIES AND FALSEHOODS being pished through on the Greek pages are a disgrace, and show that Greeks are not fit to be members of the European Union. THe correct data from the 2001 Census and official reports have been put on these pages by me and others time and again, and Greek nationalists have decided to remove them. So, once again, THERE ARE NOT 98% GREEKS IN GREECE SO STOP THE CRAP. I have tired of putting links to official reports when idiots here remove them. Just grow up and learn how to make correct arguments, instead of the childish GREEKS ARE WONDERFUL AND CLEVER mentality.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.202.17.146 (talk • contribs) .

JKelly is out of line - this is nothing but propaganda and lies - Like any other Balkan country Greece has a multitude of minorities. Step back into line JKelly and stop peddling this Greek extremist propaganda

How about we focus on real issues like the ongoing Turkish genocide of millions of Kurds and end the childish rant? If Greece is so bad then why do 10's of millions of tourists go there to enjoy themselves each year? --Xenophonos 06:51, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

- Xenophonos: Where the F**K did you get your info from? You obviously must live in "la la land" to say that that there is a Turkish genocide of Kurds. In case you don't know, there is a Kurdish terrorist organization called the PKK. They hide in mountains in Turkey and kill whatever Turk goes by. Over 200,000 Turks have died because of the PKK, and the number grows everyday! I have great sympathy for you if you support terrorism - I would never support terrorism in Greece and call it a Greek genocide campaign! Get your facts straight!

- Mr. 87.202.17.146, please calm down and sign your comments. I'd like to know who we're talking to and where you are from. You sound like a nationalist teenager who has just learned something "bad" about Greece's past from a grandfather who was wronged somehow, and is taking out his anger on an ecnyclopedia website. Relax, dude. And stop assuming that all contributors to this article are Greeks. The reason the official data states 98% of the population as ethnic Greek is because the majority of immigrants are undocumented. Everyone in Greece knows it and the government does not hide it that there are an estimated 1 million undocumented immigrants living in the country, equivalent to 10% of the population. However, just as any other country on the planet, only citizens and legal resident aliens are included in official census figures. Therefore, your rants that "Greece doesn't belong in the EU" are obsolete. The article clearly addresses this issue by noting that undocumented immigrants are not included in official figures. Now quit being such a baby, and try and contribute constructively. Skyduster 23:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

How can you deny the Kurdish Genocide?!?? It has been going on for years! Just like the Armenian Genocide! And stop posting propaganda links. YOU are the one here who is racist, because YOU put all Greeks in one group, calling ALL Greeks Racist and Nationalistic. There you go, fellow, you just proved yourself to be an angry teenager, just like Skyduster said.80.217.144.31 08:21, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Bogus tourism statistic

The article said "In particular during 2005, Greece was the top tourist destination amongst Americans." I removed this statement, which is patently false. I couldn't find 2005 statistics, but U.S. government statistics for 2003 show Greece in 27th place for 2003, and 23rd place using the max of the last 10 years' tourism. It seems unlikely that in two years Greece increased its tourism enough to match Italy (#5, 460% more tourists), the UK (#3, 1010%) or Mexico (#1, 5900%). --Macrakis 00:25, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

it's obviously bogus. most of the english speaking tourists are british. maybe someone can't tell the difference. --Fs 03:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

It's defintely bogus. The most popular foreign countries for Americans are Canada and Mexico, whilst Americans make up only around 5% of all tourists who visit Greece, according to statistics that were once accessible through GNTO/EOT's website. Good job picking that up. Skyduster 23:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

- What happened to all the culture that Greeks have stolen from Albania? Music? - What happened to all the Albanian population that is living in Greece? Arvaties, Cham, imigrant Albanians, and the so called ethnic Greeks from Albania? who in real life are Albanians. - What happened to all the land Greeks have taken from Cham Albania and Macedonia which you people modified and make it look yours? Does the words Çameria remind you people of something.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.40.114.51 (talk • contribs) 86.124.28.175 12:03, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

As the Greek state expanded, it came to own territory with many different ethnicities living there already. The Greek state came to control the land the same way that all countries have, by coercive means, and over time, those people living there either assimilated or had to leave. This is nothing new... and yes, I've heard of Cham Albanians. I have a question for you; have you ever heard of Greeks from the Pontus, and what happened to them? --Xenophonos 06:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Alphabet

The development of the Greek alphabet from the Phoeniciian one is acknowledged by the Greek government [4], Encyclopedia Britannica [5], [6] Andreas 15:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia, Greek alphabet, the Greek alphabet is the first true alphabet in the sense that it includes vowels and consonants. In this way the Greeks adopted and modified symbols of the Phoenician script and not an alphabet. I would prefer a citation from an authority in lingustics and not just the government or Britannica, but not being an expert in the field, I cannot provide any. Donnerstag 16:14, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

It's really rather simple: The term "alphabet" is used in two different senses. The traditional and most widely accepted sense of the term "alphabet" is that which includes the Phoenician script, as well as all the other modern Semitic scripts (everybody talks of the Hebrew alphabet, the Arabic alphabet etc.) Used in that sense, the Greeks very very clearly adopted and modified the Phoenician alphabet. No doubt at all. - There is a second, more technical and narrower sense of the term "alphabet", used by some linguists in this specialized field, among them the authors of an eminent recent reference work (Daniels et al., The World's Writing Systems). These authors contrast "alphabets in the narrow sense" with two other classes of writing systems, called "abjads" and "abugidas". Used in this sense, the Phoenician script is not an alphabet, and the Greek one is the first. Note that this doesn't imply that the "true alphabets" are in any way more advanced or better than the other two classes. Lukas Lukas ^(T.|@) (faking my own signature because the server keeps throwing me out.)

The articles Greek alphabet and History of the alphabet have references. Babiniotis in Συνοπτική ιστορία της Ελληνικής γλώσσας talks about the "Φοινικική γραφή" (p. 76) and gives more details on pp. 80-82: Έτσι οι Έλληνες τροποποίησαν, συμπλήρωσαν και, κυρίως, μετέτρεψαν το φοινικικό αλφάβητο σε φωνολογικό, πράγμα που αποτελεί και την πιό σημαντική καινοτομία σε παγκόσμια κλίμακα. Andreas 18:03, 14 February 2006 (UTC), information by User:Macrakis

If you want more Greek references, there's a chapter by A. Kontogiannis, in: M. Kopidakis (ed.), Ιστορία της ελληνικής γλώσσας, Athens 1999, ISBN 960-201-122-X. Lukas ^(T.|@) 19:32, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Lukas, synoptically, what is the evidence a) Greek alphabet evolved from Phoenician and not Linear A, Linear B, or Cypriot which predate Phoenician, and have clear correlations with the Greek alphabet, and b) what is the evidence Phoenician did not evolve from the previous.

Look at the shapes of the letters,their names, and their order in the alphabet, they are very similar between Greek and Phenician. That's why Phenician was included in the table.Linear A was not Greek anyway. Linear B is a syllabic script with completely different shapes. The Phoenician alphabet evolved from Egyptian Hieroglyphs. Linear B seems to be unrelated to Egyptian writing. A table of corrspondence between Hieroglyphs and Hebrew is found at Middle Bronze Age alphabets Andreas 16:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Forgive me, but not only are the shapes not "completely different" between Greek and Linear B, but there is clear correlation. You can view all mentioned scripts at www.ancientscripts.com. Linear B script is found in mainland Greece and has symbols that easily correlate, and can be considered predecessors to tau, alpha, digammo(F), phi, theta, omicron, psi, delta, upsilon, pi, xi, rho, etc. Furthermore, Linear B is clearly a descendant of Linear A, and your mention that Linear A is not Greek is false, as of this moment, the question is inconclusive & Linear A is undeciphered. I agree that there are clearer correlations between Phoenician and Greek, than Greek and Linear B, however I have yet to see evidence both Phoenician and Greek did not develop from Linear B. The previously mentioned site contests Phoenician derived from proto-Sinaitic (which derived from hieroglyphic), though, average date ranges for Linear B and proto-Sinaitic are 1350 BC and 1500 BC, respectively. Not so far apart.

According to same site, I am expected to believe that the Phoenician "F" symbol ("he") derived from a stick figure and not from the symbol third to bottom in the "e" column, of the Linear B script on ancientscripts.com. Common sense dictates this version to be more likely; "he" is not the only example. Observe "aleph", "daleth", "res" as the most striking examples of Phoenician characters with far closer Linear B counterparts than the proposed proto-Sinaitic ones.

The discrepency in position, or sound can find an explanation in the Greek "dark ages". It is not unlikely, Greeks of the archaic period rediscovered the Mycenean Linear B symbols altering, and assigning different phonetics to them, since the Linear B writing system came out of use during the dark ages. I sincerely hope there is no "agenda" in interpreting the above information, and I am looking for an expert to analyze this argument, before I change related articles.

I would also like the above information to be disputed with conclusive evidence and references, and the questions I put forth in the previous post to be answered adequately. a) what is the evidence Greek alphabet derived from Phoenician not Linear A, Linear B, or ancient Cypriot... b) what is the evidence both Greek and Phoenician did not evolve from Linear B. And I would add, that the average date range of Linear A is 1600 BC (older than proto-Sinaitic). I am not able to find a clear representation of the Linear A symbols to make a comparison, though I suspect a valid question to be, did Phoenician derive from Linear A. I am skeptical that Greek evolved from a foreign script when traces of Linear B existed in the mainland, and correlations exist. Phoenician influence extended via trade, but the Linear A writing Minoans, who heavily influenced Mycenean Greece, traded centuries before the Phoenicians. Minoan contacts may have served as a transfer point for Linear B to North Africa. Perhaps the issue is ambiguous, whatever the Greek government point of view may be. I hope I've been concise and clear in my argument.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.61.42.109 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is not the place for speculation and open-ended discussion. WP reports the mainstream positions (and prominent minority positions) of serious researchers. I am not aware of a single serious scholar who considers Linear B and the Greek alphabet to be related, or who denies that the Greek alphabet derives from the Phoenician. Are you? (And I don't mean newspaper articles or popular magazines like Davlos.) --Macrakis 14:08, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

History section is huge (τεράστιο)

Country entries should reflect a country's political dynamics, socio-economic factors, defence and security issues and foreign relations. Also of interest are media issues.Politis 13:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

But, all of that could be very well adressed exitensively in sub-articles such as History of Greece, History of Modern Greece etc. Only a summary of these sub-articles should be included in this main article. --Michalis Famelis 21:26, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Relevent material at Wikipedia:Summary style and Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries. Jkelly 21:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

The history section is already huge; this article is about the country. See wikipedia country guidelines, Italy is a good example. Politis 12:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

FYROM name

Why the internationally recognised name of Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is changed to Republic of Macedonia? This dispute is going on for 15 years and it has not been resolved. Until it IS resolved, everyone should stick with UN, EU and NATO adopted name for the country. This is as NPOV as it can get. --Avg 22:15, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

The name you have invented: "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" (and especially: "FYROM")doesn't exist, expect in Greek propaganda.

The reference to my country (which name is Macedonia) which should be used only in UN is "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia", while it is clear that anybody may use its own name. We (Macedonians) accept to negotiate and explain to you ("Greeks") why is our name Macedonia, but we do not accept to change our name, just because, you want that.

On the contrary, I think that your name ("Greeks") is not appropriate, because you are mixture of nations, such as Macedonians (like me, who are geneticly majority in southern Macedonia, especially in Voden, Lerin, Kostur and Kukus), Athenians, Thesallians, Albanians, Armenians, Jews, Turks (etc....) who established their country in 1821 (just 100 years before us and thus have some adventage which they are (ab)using) and took the name which Romans gave to Danaians (as we named you before, such in the times of Alexander the Great, which you very like).

Just to mention that you are reffering to some times from before 24 centuries, WHILE at the same time you forget to remember 50 years ago, when Greek language was almost non existant in sothern Macedonia, and half of "Greeks" which inhabit it now (and TODAY insist that are Macedonians) where somewhere in Asia Minor or Black Sea.

That statement can't be more false. How can Greeks not have lived there if they fought the Germans (WWII) there? And how can you identify yourselves with Alexander the Great when you ("Macedonians") arrived in the southern Balkans at 600 A.D? You have no right to call yourselves Macedonians if the Greeks do not, because the Greeks are the historical Macedonians. And it is spelled Thessalians, btw. Alexander did not name the Greeks Danaians, because he called himself Greek. The entire statement is FYROM propaganda which you are taught about in school. To be honest, you began calling yourselves Macedonians the latest 30 years, before that the entire issue was non-existant. And you began to call yourselves Macedonians because of the "Golden Age"-syndrome (Poor countries look back at history), but since you have no history (You can't claim Bulgarian history because that is already taken by the Bulgarians), you take Greek history.

6000+ text has been found in the historical region of Macedon. Not a single one is written in anything but Greek (Which means: Everyone of them is written in Greek). Sure, the Greek dialect the ancient Macedonians used might have been a little different from Koine Greek, but so was all Greek dialects. Lakonian Greek was not like Attic (Compare: Thalatta-Thalassa), yet they are both seen as Greek. Why should Macedonian Greek differ? All ancient Macedonian names but one (Which has Illyrian roots) are Greek. It is clear that the ancient Macedonians spoke Greek, and I know what the most common response is: "They adopted the Greek language". This statement is very wrong, because names are a great way to see language. All their names mean something in Greek. The cities which Alexander and his Diadochoi (Greek word: Sucessors) founded was in Greek names. Also, they could not have adopted the Greek alphabet, because if they had, they would write like the Thracians and Illyrians, using Greek letters but Thracian/Illyrian words. Like I do now, I use Latin letters but English words.

Besides, the ancient Macedonian Kings claimed Greek heritage, both before Phillip II and Alexander the Great, and after them. The Greeks considered them to be Greeks, they let them participate at the Olympic Games, and whilst only a few Macedonians participated at 480 B.C. and none before that, is of the simple fact that they had yet to come in to contact. You see, Macedon is surrounded by high mountains. Yet one of the first times the ancient Macedonians and southern Greeks met, they understood each other. Alexander I (Not the Great, he was III), called himself Greek, spoke Greek and participated at the Olympic Games. Herodotus called them Greeks, the Persians called them Greeks (Yauna Takabara: Greeks with the hat), Titus Livius called them Greeks. Almost everyone but Demosthenes called them Greeks. In our day, only a few historians say that they were not Greeks, the majority of them being(Suprise surprise)FYROM:ians. The ancient Macedonians had Mycenean customs, the ancient Macedonians was EVEN counted in the Greek Fleet!

Now, the southern Greeks had nothing to gain by calling them Greeks. If you look at a map showing Greek colonies, you will see but a few in Macedon, even though it is a fertile land and is close to southern Greece. Yet it was not colonized, while even Spain was. Why? Because the ancient Macedonians was considered Greeks, so they could not be colonized.

And now, I ask you, what do we have against this? Some persons claiming to live in the historical region of Macedon, while they actually live in ancient Paionia? And their only arguments being: "You can't say that they only wrote in Greek because there is not enough evidence", yea, like there is tons of other texts, inscriptions and coins written in something else? And then of course, the "genes", which has been proven wrong by other scientists dozens of times. And little Demosthenes, an enemy of Phillip II who wanted nothing else but see Athens rise to power again. I wonder what is the easiest: To unite the southern Greeks against fellow Greeks, or against Barbarians? Hmmm....80.217.144.31 07:58, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

You are of course right, but that's not the issue, the country is officially called Republic of Macedonia and this is how is called by UN. Wikipedia should use official names no matter how "wrong" or "unfair" they are. (EDIT: the official name is "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia", not "Republic of Macedonia", but not "F.Y.R.O.M." either) -- AdrianTM 12:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Official Country Names

Surprisingly, the Official Country Names are not observed in wikipedia articles. For example, the Official websites of EU, UN and NATO are shown bellow:

Official EU website

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Macedonia gained its independence peacefully from Yugoslavia in 1991, but Greece's objection to the new state's use of what it considered a Hellenic name and symbols delayed international recognition, which occurred under the provisional designation of "the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia." In 1995, Greece lifted a 20-month trade embargo and the two countries agreed to normalize relations. The United States began referring to Macedonia by its constitutional name, Republic of Macedonia, in 2004 and negotiations continue between Greece and Macedonia to resolve the name issue. Some ethnic Albanians, angered by perceived political and economic inequities, launched an insurgency in 2001 that eventually won the support of the majority of Macedonia's Albanian population and led to the internationally-brokered Framework Agreement, which ended the fighting by establishing a set of new laws enhancing the rights of minorities. The undetermined status of neighboring Kosovo, implementation of the Framework Agreement, and a weak economy continue to be challenges for Macedonia.86.124.28.168 01:03, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Official UN website

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Official NATO website

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

It would be useful if those editors who would prefer to use other names like, Republic of Macedonia, or Macedonia could also provide their sources. Until then, let's stick to the above Official Country Name. Odysses (☜) 09:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

However, this discussion is out of place here, it belongs to Talk:Republic of Macedonia Andreas 16:34, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Well done Andreas, you reference two links from FYROMian government! Of course they want to be called Republic of Macedonia! This is the FYROMian POV. And the discussion is not out of place, as long as there are people who keep changing the name FYROM to Republic of Macedonia on this page. Once again, the NPOV is FYROM. --Avg 18:28, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

The history of the territory and people of the FYROM was part of the history of the larger region of Macedonia until the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), when the region was divided among Greece, Serbia, and Bulgaria. Macedonia had been a province of the Ottoman Empire for nearly 500 years, but by the early 20th century the declining empire was losing its grip on the region. In the 19th century the empire lost one after another of its Balkan possessions, and by the end of that century only Macedonia, Albania, and Thrace remained under Ottoman control. After the Congress of Berlin (1878) had created a virtually independent Bulgaria, which became completely independent in 1908, and enlarged Greece and Serbia to the borders of Ottoman Macedonia, these three states began competing for the allegiance of the Macedonian population by supporting rival schools, national churches, and armed bands. The people of Macedonia increasingly identified themselves as Greeks or Bulgarians, or as members of a separate (Slavic) Macedonian nation. An armed terrorist group, founded in 1893 and best known as the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO), provoked local uprisings. The IMRO hoped that Ottoman reprisals would provoke the great powers of Europe to intervene and liberate Macedonia. The IMRO was itself split into factions, some seeking autonomy as a step toward union with Bulgaria and others seeking an independent Macedonia.

In 1912 Greece, Bulgaria, and Serbia agreed to partition Macedonia and, together with Montenegro, attacked and defeated the Ottoman Empire in the First Balkan War. Then the victors quarreled over their shares of Macedonia, prompting the Second Balkan War (1913). In that conflict, Serbia and Greece, joined by Romania and the Ottoman Empire, quickly defeated Bulgaria. Greece acquired southern or Aegean Macedonia, and Serbia took northern or Vardar Macedonia. Bulgaria was left with a small piece of eastern Macedonia, known as Pirin Macedonia, and an enduring grudge nurtured by the conviction that all Macedonian Slavs were actually or potentially Bulgarians. Serbs called their share of Macedonia South Serbia and tried to force the population to accept a Serbian identity. In 1915, during World War I (1914-1918), Bulgarians returned as initially welcome, but later resented, occupiers. At the end of the war, with Bulgaria among the defeated Central Powers, Vardar Macedonia, slightly enlarged at Bulgaria’s expense, was again South Serbia and part of the new Serb-dominated Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, later renamed Yugoslavia. Serbs were sent as colonists. Efforts to give the native population a Serbian identity resumed as did the IMRO’s terrorist activities, which included the assassination of King Aleksandar I of Yugoslavia in 1934.

MACEDONIA IA NOT GREEK86.124.28.168 00:57, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Em..yes it is? Go look that up, I have already written about this several times.

A person or place may have one or more nicknames. In formal documentation though, the Official Name should be indicated. Country Names should not reflect POV of editors or administrators. It seems reasonable to use in wikipedia articles the Official registered name in EU, UN, or NATO. Unless this is a Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde situation.

I've posted it here because even Wikipedia administrators get confused in this article and write for the boundaries to the north of Greece as Republic of Macedonia instead of the "Official country Name Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Shown enlarged above Odysses (☜) 11:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Your definition of official is by itself POV, the name given by the government is as official as that by UN etc. Andreas 14:34, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

FYROM is the name used by this country to register into UN and to apply for membership into EU and NATO, as shown in the Official websites above. Hence, this country appears in the respective country-member lists under "FYROM". It is customary for countries to apply for membership to these organizations using their official name by which other country-members address to them. Should the official name change as for example in the case of Zaire (Zaire, its name was changed on 17 May 1997 to the Democratic Republic of the Congo) they should apply to rename and the name on the lists should change accordingly. This, I trust, is the General Practice, it's not a POV. Odysses (☜) 16:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Every country of the world, apart from GREECE, refers to the country as Macedonia or Republic of Macedonia. As Greece has blocked the recognition of that name in the UN, effectively there is no international name for the Republic of Macedonia. This is NOT the same as being the official name: essentially, Greece has managed to bring its own fucked-up mentality to the rest of the Balkans [as if they don't have enough problems anyway]. So cut the crap with "official names". And while we're at it, why can't Greeks accept official data from the Greek state? This page, and all the other Greek pages, are full of crap invented by Greeks, instead of respectable scholarship and official state data... You people make me puke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.202.109.36 (talk • contribs)

Dear anon, your arguments above are perfectly reasonable and constructive until the last three sentences, which besides contributing nothing to the discussion, tend to undermine your own credibility. If your goal is to improve this encyclopedia by ensuring that the (Slav) Macedonian positions are well-represented, you would do well to avoid such intemperate language. --Macrakis 15:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

My dear troll, I'd like to thank you for the entertainment you offer to us. I'm an optimist. I do believe that some time in the far future, you will be able to engage in a civilised conversation. --Avg 23:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Back to the substantive issue here, clearly Greece has blocked the use of the name "Republic of Macedonia" in those international forums where it has some diplomatic influence. Equally clearly, the state itself uses "Republic of Macedonia" as its official name. Some other countries (e.g. the U.S.) also use "Republic of Macedonia". The situation is similar to the "Republic of China", which in most international organizations (if it is accepted at all) is called "Chinese Taipei" because of the objections of the P.R.C., but in Wikipedia keeps its preferred name for itself, the "Republic of China". --Macrakis 15:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Macrakis, there is no "clearly" in this case, so don't use this kind of words to influence others. If there is something "clear", this is that the name FYROM is a temporary name accepted by BOTH parts, until the naming dispute is resolved. The name Republic of Macedonia is the name the state uses for itself INTERNALLY. FYROM is not Greek POV, it's NPOV. Greeks call this state "Skopje" as you very well know. Have you seen anyone here referring to FYROM as Skopje? Although that's how we refer to it in everyday talk. I would say it's bad form to try finding similarities with other non-relevant cases just because the outcome suits you. --Avg 18:47, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Greeks do not use 'Skopje', they use 'ta Skopia' (although they use same name as for the city, like Luxembourg). Greeks also say 'Gallia" for France etc. Germany is de:Deutschland, fr:Allemagne, hr:Njemačka, fi:Saksa, and see the Names of the Greeks. See also pars pro toto Andreas 19:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes of course you are right, I have just translated "Skopia" to English, for example FYROMians don't use "Macedonia" in everyday speech, they use "Makedonija". But I think we're deviating a bit. The point is that Macrakis repeatedly tries to persuade the readers that it's the Greeks who insist on the name FYROM, while the Greeks have never accepted or used internally any name containing the word "Macedonia" inside. I'm trying to show that FYROM is a compromise, not a name imposed by Greece. --Avg 19:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I have merely posted the sites of EU, UN and NATO on which FYROM is indicated. The unsigned (87.202.109.36 was posted from Athens [7]) insolent response to the above sites is probably suggesting to discard these sites as utterly unreliable and take it's saying for granted. Terribly sorry, not interested in propaganda. Odysses (☜) 20:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

This very discussion (the naming of FYROM) has been repeated over and over again in Talk: Republic of Macedonia. Is it really necessary to have the same thing here? It certainly does not help improve the Greece article, and I'm inclined to think that it would be more suitable for a mailing list rather than Wikipedia... To all concerned please think over if having this conversation here is any good at all... --Michalis Famelis 21:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Having on the article about Greece in a very prominent position the FYROMian POV is very offensive. Certainly you can't expect something like that to stay as it is. This will be an eternal revert war until logic prevails. --Avg 23:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

There is little point in discussing this here - you should go to Talk:Republic of Macedonia (new) and explain why you think Wikipedia should refer to State X as FYROM and not "Republic of Macedonia". Despite the fact that Wikipedia is inherently inconsistent, it has been ensured that the Republic of Macedonia is referred as such everywhere. You're wasting your time here... --Latinus 23:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

MACEDONIA IS THE ORIGINAL NAME

Macedonia is the original name of this land which is the only free part of Macedonia today the other parts of Macedonia are under so called Greeces, Bulgarian, Albanian and Serbian rule, where the people do not have rights as Macedonians. People who are confused with the name should look at maps before world war I when Macedonia was not devided. If MACEDONIA should be called FYROM than the so called Greece should be called FTROG (Former Turkies Republic of Greece), just as the northern part of Macedonia was a part of Yugoslavia so called Greece without the northern part of Macedonia was a part of Turkey. The only reason so called Greeks have a problem with the Macedonian name is because they are afraid the people would want to unite Macedonia in it's original borders, before world war I the southern part of Macedonia was never in history apart of Greece. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.158.29.191 (talk • contribs)

Clear BS, go look what I wrote further up. And before WW1 Greece still had Greek Macedonia. You are just trying to spread propaganda.

The reason why FYROM is called Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is to show distinction from the Greek province of Makedonia, not to advertise which State it was once a part of. Furthermore, both parts of your last sentence are absolutely false and uninformed; the FYROMians have no power nor legitimacy in expanding their borders and the Greeks of Macedonia are thoroughy proud to be part of Greece. Your second point...the Capital city of Macedonia under Phillip and Alexander the Great was Pella, well within Greek borders, furthermore, they conquered North even beyond the Danube, putting much of the Balkans within the Greek sphere of influence going as far back as 380 BC. The Byzantine Empire, as we all know, inhabited much of the Balkans as well for more than 1000 years. Please, opinions are not the same as fact, do not discuss a subject of which you have no knowledge. --Xenophonos 05:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Mr. 69.158.29.191...please sign your comments so that we know who we are talking to. This is not a political message board. It is an encyclopedia website. This is a discussion on the name of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia / Republic of Macedonia, whatever you want to call it; and not a fight about the history of the region. But since you brought it up that "Macedonia was never a part of Greece," allow me to point out that you harbor a very skewed understanding of history. Your position on FYROM's/Rep. of Macedonia's name is perfectly valid, but your references to history expose a deficiency on your part. The concept of nation-states did not exist until the late 18th/early 19th centuries, and -yes- until the early 20th century, Macedonia was not a part of the modern Greek State (newly independent from the Ottoman Empire in the early 19th century). However the region of Macedonia has played a very prominent role in the history of Greek-speaking culture and civilization for millenia. Just because it was not part of the modern-day recognized Greek State until 1913, does not mean it was never a part of Greek history, or that there was never a Greek-speaking presence in the region. To dispute this, you would not only be rejecting millenia of recorded history and countless historical artifacts, but you would also be making a bad impression of yourself. Skyduster 23:59, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I must admit that all these unsigned and offensive, at the same time, articles against Greece and Greeks are very amusing. Nevertheless, facts matter and which are these facts?

Of course, most people around the world use the term "Macedonia" for this country, but "FYROM" remains the only official name for UN and many states around the world. Hence, why don't we have the right to use the name "FYROM" for this country? Who has the right to impede us, since this name remains the only internationally official?
I would gladly discuss the history of Macedonia and of its residents. But, please, speak with evidence, facts and data. Some anoms speak about maps before World War 1. What maps? Maps of the Othoman Empire?! And what original borders before World War I? The borders of the Othoman Empire? Because no other borders existed in the region during this period.

--Yannismarou 21:45, the 25th of March 2006 (UTC)

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! --Hectorian 03:26, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

The ancient macedonians spoke a dialect of Greek, attended the Olympic games, read and wrote Greek literature, worshipped the Greek gods, used Greek currency, used Greek military tactics and weapons, and were members of the Delian league and other Pan- Hellenic leagues. The ancient Macedonians claimed dorian blood (like the Spartans), and rulers such as Phillip II and Alexander the Great were part of the Argead dynasty which was from Argos. Alexander the Great was educated by the Greek tutor Aristotle, and was labelled a 'Philhellene' (Lover of Greece). There are many documented quotes where Argead kings admit their Hellenic descent including the following by Alexander I: "For I (Alexander I) myself am by ancient descent a Greek, and I would not willingly see Hellas change her freedom for slavery." Alexander the Great would sleep with the Iliad (an epic Greek poem written by Homer) under his pillow as he felt deep admiration to the heroes of the story. He traced his ancestory back to Achilles and to Hercules, who both feature in the Iliad.

The occupants of FYRO"M" are Slavs who migrated into the Balkans in the 6th century. Linguists world wide have proven that they speak a dialect of Bulgarian. They are falsely trying to appropriate history in order to validate their presence in the hotly debated Balkans.

Domestic terrorism

I cut the following here for discussion:

In June 2002, Greek police achieved a major breakthrough in dealing with domestic terrorism when it managed to arrest the members of the Revolutionary Organization 17 November terrorist group. The group had formed in 1974 and was responsible for the killing of several American, British and Turkish officials residing in Greece as well as for the killing of prominent Greek politicians (such as Pavlos Bakoyiannis, late husband of the newly appointed Foreign Minister, Dora Bakoyannis). The trial of those arrested was started in March 2003, and ended in December 2003, with the conviction of 15 defendants. Three defendants were acquitted, all of them on the basis of reasonable doubt [8], while a fourth defendant, Theologos Psaradellis, was acquitted because the statute of limitations for his participation in a terrorist organization had expired. [9]

I don't think that this belongs here at all. See above discussion about length. This belongs in either the November 17 group article, or as a summary in Law enforcement in Greece, but not here as a paragraph's worth of Greece's 2000+ year history. Jkelly 17:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm down with that. :) Project2501a 18:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

--Can't see anything wrong with a removal on these grounds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Porfyrios (talk • contribs) The history of the territory and people of the FYROM was part of the history of the larger region of Macedonia until the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), when the region was divided among Greece, Serbia, and Bulgaria. Macedonia had been a province of the Ottoman Empire for nearly 500 years, but by the early 20th century the declining empire was losing its grip on the region. In the 19th century the empire lost one after another of its Balkan possessions, and by the end of that century only Macedonia, Albania, and Thrace remained under Ottoman control. After the Congress of Berlin (1878) had created a virtually independent Bulgaria, which became completely independent in 1908, and enlarged Greece and Serbia to the borders of Ottoman Macedonia, these three states began competing for the allegiance of the Macedonian population by supporting rival schools, national churches, and armed bands. The people of Macedonia increasingly identified themselves as Greeks or Bulgarians, or as members of a separate (Slavic) Macedonian nation. An armed terrorist group, founded in 1893 and best known as the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO), provoked local uprisings. The IMRO hoped that Ottoman reprisals would provoke the great powers of Europe to intervene and liberate Macedonia. The IMRO was itself split into factions, some seeking autonomy as a step toward union with Bulgaria and others seeking an independent Macedonia.

In 1912 Greece, Bulgaria, and Serbia agreed to partition Macedonia and, together with Montenegro, attacked and defeated the Ottoman Empire in the First Balkan War. Then the victors quarreled over their shares of Macedonia, prompting the Second Balkan War (1913). In that conflict, Serbia and Greece, joined by Romania and the Ottoman Empire, quickly defeated Bulgaria. Greece acquired southern or Aegean Macedonia, and Serbia took northern or Vardar Macedonia. Bulgaria was left with a small piece of eastern Macedonia, known as Pirin Macedonia, and an enduring grudge nurtured by the conviction that all Macedonian Slavs were actually or potentially Bulgarians. Serbs called their share of Macedonia South Serbia and tried to force the population to accept a Serbian identity. In 1915, during World War I (1914-1918), Bulgarians returned as initially welcome, but later resented, occupiers. At the end of the war, with Bulgaria among the defeated Central Powers, Vardar Macedonia, slightly enlarged at Bulgaria’s expense, was again South Serbia and part of the new Serb-dominated Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, later renamed Yugoslavia. Serbs were sent as colonists. Efforts to give the native population a Serbian identity resumed as did the IMRO’s terrorist activities, which included the assassination of King Aleksandar I of Yugoslavia in 1934.86.124.28.168 00:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

HISTORY Throughout its history, the present-day territory of Macedonia has been a crossroads for both traders and conquerors moving between the European continent and Asia Minor. Each of these transiting powers left its mark upon the region, giving rise to a rich and varied cultural and historical tradition.

After the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the territory of Macedonia fell under the control of the Byzantine Empire in the 6th and 7th centuries. It was during this period that large groups of Slavic people migrated to the Balkan region. The Ottoman Turks conquered the territory in the 15th century; it remained under Ottoman Turkish rule until 1912.

After more than four centuries of rule, Ottoman power in the region began to wane, and by the middle of the 19th century, Greece, Bulgaria, and Serbia were competing for influence in the territory. During this time, a nationalist movement emerged and grew in Macedonia. The latter half of the 19th century, and continuing into the early part of the 20th century, was marked by sporadic nationalist uprisings, culminating in the Ilinden Uprising of August 2, 1903. Macedonian revolutionaries liberated the town of Krushevo and established the short-lived Republic of Krushevo, which was put down by Ottoman forces after 10 days. Following Ottoman Turkey's defeat by the allied Balkan countries--Bulgaria, Serbia, Montenegro, and Greece--during the First Balkan War in autumn 1912, the same allies fought the Second Balkan War over the division of Macedonia. The August 1913 Treaty of Bucharest ended this conflict by dividing the territory between Bulgaria, Greece, and Serbia. The 1919 Treaty of Versailles sanctioned partitioning Macedonia between The Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, Bulgaria, and Greece. In the wake of the First World War, Vardar Macedonia (the present day area of the Republic of Macedonia) was incorporated into the newly formed Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes.

Throughout much of the Second World War, Bulgaria and Italy occupied Macedonia. Many people joined partisan movements during this time and succeeded in liberating the region in late 1944. Following the war, Macedonia became one of the constituent republics of the new Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia under Marshall Tito. During this period, Macedonian culture and language flourished.

As communism fell throughout Eastern Europe in the late 20th century, Macedonia followed its other federation partners and declared its independence from Yugoslavia in late 1991. Macedonia was the only republic of the former Yugoslavia whose secession in 1991 was not clouded by ethnic or other armed conflict, although the ethnic Albanian population declined to participate in the referendum on independence. The new Macedonian constitution took effect November 20, 1991 and called for a system of government based on a parliamentary democracy. The first democratically elected coalition government was led by Prime Minister Branko Crvenkovski of the Social Democratic Union of Macedonia (SDSM) and included the ethnic Albanian Party for Democratic Prosperity (PDP). Kiro Gligorov became the first President of an independent Macedonia.

President Gligorov was the first president of a former Yugoslav republic to relinquish office. In accordance with the terms of the Macedonian constitution, his presidency ended in November 1999 after 8 years in office, which included surviving a car bombing assassination attempt in 1995. He was succeeded by former Deputy Foreign Minister Boris Trajkovski (VMRO-DPMNE) , who defeated Tito Petkovski (SDSM) in a second-round run-off election for the presidency on November 14, 1999. Trajkovski's election was confirmed by a December 5, 1999 partial re-vote in 230 polling stations, which the Macedonian Supreme Court mandated due to election irregularities.

In November 1998 parliamentary elections, the SDSM lost its majority. A new coalition government emerged under the leadership of Prime Minister Ljubco Georgievski of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization-Democratic Party for Macedonian National Unity (VMRO-DPMNE). The initial coalition included the ethnic Albanian Democratic Party of Albanians (DPA).

During the Yugoslav period, Macedonian ethnic identity was evident in that most of Macedonia's Slavic population identified themselves as Macedonians, while several minority groups, in particular ethnic Albanians, retained their own distinct political culture and language. Although interethnic tensions simmered under Yugoslav authority and during the first decade of its independence, the country avoided ethnically motivated conflict until several years after independence. Ethnic minority grievances, which had erupted on occasion (1995 and 1997), rapidly began to gain political currency in late 2000, leading many in the ethnic Albanian community in Macedonia to question their minority protection under, and participation in, the government. Tensions erupted into open hostilities in Macedonia in February 2001, when a group of ethnic Albanians near the Kosovo border carried out armed provocations that soon escalated into an insurgency. Purporting to fight for greater civil rights for ethnic Albanians in Macedonia, the group seized territory and launched attacks against government forces. Many observers ascribed other motives to the so-called National Liberation Army (NLA), including support for criminality and the assertion of political control over affected areas. The insurgency spread through northern and western Macedonia during the first half of 2001. Under international mediation, a cease-fire was brokered in July 2001, and the government coalition was expanded in July 2001 to form a grand coalition which included the major opposition parties.

The expanded coalition of ruling ethnic Macedonian and ethnic Albanian political leaders, with facilitation by U.S. and European Union (EU) diplomats, negotiated and then signed the Ohrid Framework Agreement in August 2001, which brought an end to the fighting. The agreement called for implementation of constitutional and legislative changes, which lay the foundation for improved civil rights for minority groups. The Macedonian parliament adopted the constitutional changes outlined in the accord in November 2001. The grand coalition disbanded following the signing of the Ohrid Framework Agreement and the passage of new constitutional amendments. A coalition led by Prime Minister Georgievski, including DPA and several smaller parties, completed their parliamentary term.

In September 2002 elections, an SDSM-led pre-election coalition won half of the 120 seats in parliament. Branko Crvenkovski was elected Prime Minister in coalition with the ethnic Albanian Democratic Union for Integration (DUI) party and the Liberal-Democratic Party (LDP).

On February 26, 2004 President Trajkovski died in a plane crash in Bosnia. Presidential elections were held April 14 and 28, 2004. Then-Prime Minister Branko Crvenkovski won the second round and was inaugurated President on May 12, 2004. The parliament confirmed Hari Kostov, former Interior Minister, as Prime Minister June 2, 2004. Prime Minister Kostov resigned November 15, 2004. On December 17, 2004, former Defense Minister Vlado Buckovski was confirmed by parliament as Prime Minister, maintaining the coalition with the ethnic Albanian Democratic Union for Integration (DUI) and the Liberal-Democratic (LDP) parties.

With international assistance, the SDSM-DUI-LDP governing coalition completed the legislative implementation of the Ohrid Framework Agreement, which is a precondition for Macedonia’s integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions. A November 7, 2004 referendum opposing completion of this process failed, freeing the way for the government to complete Framework Agreement implementation.

Local elections were held in March-April 2005 under a new territorial reorganization plan that consolidated the overall number of Macedonia’s municipalities and created a number of ethnically-mixed municipalities in which ethnic Albanian populations were dominant. The process of decentralization began in the new municipalities in July 2005 and is continuing.

The July 2006 parliamentary elections resulted in a VMRO-DPMNE-led government assuming power, in coalition with DPA, NSDP, and several smaller parties. The new government, which was confirmed in office by a parliamentary vote on August 26, 2006, stated its commitment to completing Framework Agreement implementation and reaffirmed its commitment to pursuing NATO and EU membership. 86.124.28.168 01:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

'Poor' culture???

Quote from section 'culture':

"Greece has a particularly poor culture and it has produced a vast number of contributions to philosophy, astronomy, science, and the arts."

Perhaps something has been lost in translation here, it doesn't make much sense. 81.79.215.123 17:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Dude, it is obviously sneaky vandalism. Be bold and remove it. --Michalis Famelis 18:00, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Removal of "The world's only Greek state"

What about Cyprus? Perhaps you mean the world's only exclusively Greek state, but I really see no merit in mentioning that. Why was it in the intro anyway? -- Avg 21:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Naming conventions (Greek)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Greek) (Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Greek)) - a policy in development for consistent transcription of Greek names and terms (both ancient and modern Greek). You're invited to comment on the proposals. 19:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)