Talk:Gyorche Petrov

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Bulgaria Mid‑importance

	Bulgaria portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bulgaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bulgaria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BulgariaWikipedia:WikiProject BulgariaTemplate:WikiProject BulgariaBulgaria
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

North Macedonia Top‑importance

	North Macedonia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North Macedonia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North Macedonia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.North MacedoniaWikipedia:WikiProject North MacedoniaTemplate:WikiProject North MacedoniaNorth Macedonia
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

It is truth that Macedonians in Republic of Macedonia regard him as Macedonian, Bulgarians regard him as Bulgarian. If Petrov while still living regarded himself like both of nations (in ethnic sense) it would be NPOV to write Bulgarian/Macedonian (etnic group) or Macedonian (etnic group)/Bulgarian. But what we can do if we can not find some evidences that Petrov had a Macedonian ethnic consciousness? If he fight for Macedonia like one of the local Bulgarians? Then it would be honest to write Bulgarian revolutionary and to specify that in RoM he is regarded like ethnic Macedonian. It is just an oppinion. --AleksandarH 20:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The key word in the whole text was BULGARIAN! The english(bulgarian) wikipedia know all about Gorce Petrov, and anything is true. But everyting what macedonian wikipedia will said is falce. Ok, now I know what is the whole. BUGARSKA PROPAGANDA —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.125.184.154 (talk) 17:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revert to consented date

This article will be reverted to an older date, on which there is consensus. This article is not neutral with all the interpretations. It has also dead links and unnecessary information like unsigned letters and school certificate. Laveol, please do not move this article to Gyorche Petrov again. Google on it and you will see that Gyorche Petrov is very very seldom used compared to Gjorce Petrov. (Toci (talk) 16:27, 14 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Certificate

There is nothing in the certificate about Bulgarian except that is Bulgarian School in Plovdiv. Please do not give any regional and ethnical interpretations without references. Keep the article without them. I do not know why is the certificate important for this article, but he had excellent grades. (Toci (talk) 21:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Quotes

I removed the "Quotes" section you can't just make a section for random quotes especially since its obviously from a book. This is POV provided by other users for some reason. Ashkani 22:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not? It's not a random quote, it's a relevant quote expressing the maker's view on a controversial issue. Also, since when are sourced from books quotes in some way ineligible for inclusion? Please don't delete sourced information.Ploutarchos 23:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats fine. Ashkani 23:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No Bulgarian concience in Gjorce's memoires, but Macedonian refering to him and his pupil friends as "We Macedonians" (Nie Makedoncheta or Nie Makedoncite)

In Gjorce Petrov memoires (Bulgarian source) there is no self declaration by Gjorce of being Bulgarian. Even more he writes (page 6) "We the pupils "the macedonians", were more loud (making noise)". He also writes on (page 64) about the dubious and egocentric (page 66) role of Bulgaria toward the liberation of Macedonia. Due to that Gjorce and his friends adopted stand of self-belief that evolved in idea od self-arming the revolutionaries (page 65) for liberation of Macedonia. Gjorce is born in Republic of Macedonia, in his memoires has declared as Macedonian and he describes the fight for liberation of Macedonia. He also never mentiones Ilinden-Preobrazenie Uprising, but he writes only about taking part in the uprising on the day Ilinden (page 167-8). (Toci (talk) 22:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Just to summarize what you did/think. So you take the info in the links for some passages of the text, but other things that are still mentioned in the book, but that you do not like, get a fact tag (basically half of the whole article). --Laveol ^T 00:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I add only changes this time. I deleted your source before because it does not says that he declared himself as Bulgarian and Macedonian and Bulgarian are mutually exclusive. He just says in your source that there are different nationalities living in Macedonia. If there are different nationalities and you choose one to attach to him it is rather biased view (Bulgarian POV). Gjorce also makes often distinctions between nasinci, (our people) and bugarin (Bulgarian) and in the time when the Macedonians (nasinci, our people) were usually regarded as Bulgarians by others, meaning member of the Bulgarian church (but you already know that). Bulgarian Exarchate was trying to make a reach in Macedonia in that time and the people were sometimes Bulgarians, sometimes Greeks, sometimes Serbian (depending of the strength of the church in the region). Brailsford writes: "I have heard a witty French consul declare that with a fund of a million francs he would undertake to make all Macedonia French. He would preach that the Macedonians are the descendants of the French crusaders who conquered Salonica in the twelfth century, and the francs would do the rest." (Brailsford also don't mentions Macedonians as separate nationality, but he also don't regard them as pure Serbians or Bulgarians, but a "Slav people derived from rather various stocks, who invaded the peninsula at different periods." (he meant slavic speaking people because he wrote before: "They are not Serbs, for their blood can hardly be purely Slavonic.")

I will add soon how and why Gjorce was murdered. That is described rather vague. He was murdered on an order by Todor Aleksandrov and that is one of the reason why the statue of Todor Aleksandrov is seen offensive and will not stand in Republic of Macedonia (this is a late reply to one of your questions on the other talks). I am sorry if you are emotionally attached to Todor Aleksandrov as figure in IMRO, but he is regarded as assasin of Gjorce Petrov who is one of the most important figures in the national history of Republic of Macedonia. Gjorce was not only hated by Alexandrov, but also by general Concev (Tsontsev) who once said to Gjorce: "Ти си тукъ зло за всички и трѣбва да се махнешъ отъ България!”. Азъ му отговорихъ, че и да съмъ мислилъ да си отивамъ вѫтре, сега нарочно ще стоя тукъ за да прѣча на неговитѣ много пакостни за Македония планове." (EN: ""You are evil for everone here and you should move away from Bulgaria!" Gjorce answered to that: "Even if I was planning to go to tomorrow, I will stay here now intentionally to disturb your malicios plans toward Macedonia.") (Toci (talk) 00:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

To be honest it looks much better now. You've included both POVs for whivh are more than encouraged. I'll try to look up some info mysself. As for Todor Alexandrov's case - the man set the monument in his own yard. Don't you allow private property in the Republic? It's a serious question and might have some really negative results for the country. Every move like moves Bulgaria closer to Greek's position which we both know is not accepted well in RoM. Cheers --Laveol ^T 08:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnicity

There is a lack of documents in favour of the Macedonian idea. What is supposed to prove Macedonian ethnicity, in fact proves exactly the opposite.Petrov mentions many times Macedonia and Macedonians, however, they are always used as geographic terms and at the same time as synonyms of Bulgarian, Thracian and Adrianopolitan.Furthermore, in his memoirs Gjorche numerous times determines the revolutionary activity in Macedonia as national liberation and unification struggle of the Bulgarian people and had never ever said even a word about any relation with ancient civilisations and so on. With all my respect but if our Macedonian friends don't manage to provide us with real reference showing that he had ever expressed ethnic Macedonian identity and considered himself as descendent of the ancient Macedonians, not of the Macedonian Bulgarians, I'll edit the article.

This article was vandalized. If no reliable explaination will be given about the unexplained actionsI am going to remove the POV, which was pushed here. Jingby (talk) 14:17, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Giving reliable sources is one of the fundamental rules of Wikipedia. I have provided American reference, where as you have put only BG. There is no need of removing it just because you do not like it.-- MacedonianBoy ^Oui? 14:20, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting

I have been trying to clean uthis article up to bring it line with the Wikipedia:Manual of Style, inlcuding:

removing repeated links per WP:OVERLINK -- it is not necessary to link concept like Macedonia (region) and Republic of Macedonia over and over again.
removing the italics from quotations -- thi is not the Wikipedia style. Quotations are placed in double quotation marks ( " ) and in regulat text, not italics.

Ground Zero | t 21:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit

In his memoirs Gjorce speaks of Macedonians ethnicaly, different from Bulgarians. Macedonians were loud and Bulgarians were more silent in the school. The second quote is about his religios belonging. Gjorce is Bulgarian because of his church, Bulgarian Exarchy. During his undercover operation, the visit to the head of the Bulgarian Exarchy, Gjorce was recognized as Bulgarian, belonging to the Bulgarian Exarchy and they speak about the position of the "Bulgarians" (exarchists) and "Greeks" (patriarchists). (Toci (talk) 22:12, 20 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

That seriously contradicts other parts of the article (not that this is not characteristic for the region). The current version sounds better and neutral. --Laveol ^T 22:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It was too explanatory before and a bit too much with words like bulgarianess. Now if the people are interested, they can read the memoirs for the longer quotes and they can decide themselves what he thought when he said Macedonian and Bulgarian. ;-)

I was a bit absent and there are suddenly lots of explanations of the quotes in several articles. The explanation should go in the talk pages and just keep the source info for the articles.

There is not much contradiction in the article. Just two sides giving arguments. I don't have much time now, but it will be good if someone adds some stories from his life in the article. He speaks for example of self-arming as prerequisite for successful Macedonian revolution. During World War 2 the Macedonian partisans self-armed themselves, liberated Skopje and the entire territory of the present day Republic of Macedonia and that put them on the victorious side in WW2. That is why Gjorce Petrov is honored as one of the most important revolutioneries in Republic of Macedonia. (Toci (talk) 23:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Yeah, I was absent as well. And you're right it'd be too langsam to explain all this. I'm glad we got to a consensus. --Laveol ^T 23:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name transliteration

The current title Gjorche Petrov seems a mix of Macedonian and Bulgarian. Using Wikipedia's standard transliteration of his Macedonian and Bulgarian first names, you get either Ѓорче --> Gjorče (or Đorče), or Гьорче --> Gyorche. I'm not sure which version is most used in English, I suggest we pick one of these. Markussep ^Talk 12:27, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An attempt at finding English usage, Google Books: Gjorche Petrov 36, Gyorche Petrov 22, Gjorče Petrov 64. The Macedonian version "Gjorče Petrov" seems most used. Markussep ^Talk 16:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not really representative. A quick look over the first page reveals not a single result that is not authored in RoM/FRYugoslavia. On the contrary, "Gyorche Petrov" is used by Bulgarian as well as Macedonian scholars in addition to Mercia MacDermott and the recent Marcel Cornis-Pope & John Neubauer book. Britannica also uses what you'd call the "Bulgarian transliteration" for Petrov's fellows Gotse Delchev, Damyan Gruev and Yane Sandanski. But Gjorče Petrov is not the "Macedonian version", it's the version as per the scientific transliteration system, which Bulgarian also uses (see some of my FAs, for example). Neither is "Gyorche Petrov" the solely Bulgarian version. And "Gjorche Petrov" is actually a very popular form in Macedonian too, as the guys don't seem to have č and the like on their keyboards.

It's no big deal for me though. I don't mind the current name and I wouldn't mind any of the others. What I fear is that it might cause another edit war :( Todor →Bozhinov 16:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not surprised that most of the literature about Petrov is written by Macedonians and Bulgarians. The non-Macedonian-or-Bulgarian-author argument is a good one, and I see some of the Gjorče Petrov hits are actually for the suburb of Skopje. Since I prefer to use one of the standard transliterations, and "Gjorche Petrov" is not widely used in English, I suggest moving to "Gyorche Petrov", and mentioning the alternative spelling "Gjorče Petrov" in the lead. Markussep ^Talk 08:30, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest moving the article on Gjorce's real name Georgi Petrov.

As a Macedonian I think it is a bad combination to use Gyorche Petrov and have an interpretation (biased) article. For example, on Gjorce's certificate there is no mention of being Bulgarian and in the article under his certificate is written that he declares himself Bulgarian. In his certificate is just written that he comes from Macedonia. He is born in what is now Republic of Macedonia.

The article also has a bunch of dead links. The links must be verifiable. If they do not work, they are out. We had a consensus with Laveol on the content of the article last year (see above). Please do not revert it to the less neutral article. It is not neutral with the regional and ethnic interpretation because we really dont know what he thought. Of course that if Gjorce wrote a letter (btw, the letter is not signed) to the Bulgarian government he will not write that he needs help for the Macedonian population. He would never get anything. He did not get anything as help from Bulgaria anyways as he writes in his memoirs. Gjorce is one of the rare mavericks against the Bulgarian government in that period. (Toci (talk) 16:28, 15 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Moving to Gjorche's or Gyorche's real name Georgi Petrov Nikolov

Gjorche Petrov is not a mix. It is Macedonian transcription, it is rather spelled Gjorce Petrov. Gyorche Petrov is the Bulgarian transcription. No Macedonian will use Gyorche and majority of visitors on this article will probably come from Republic of Macedonia. Since Gjorche is the usual Macedonian transcription and Gyorche is Bulgarian, why should we not use his true name which has same transcription in Macedonian and Bulgarian. Then both Gyorche Petrov and Gjorche Petrov will redirect to Georgi Petrov Nikolov. Neutral compromise. If you have some reasons against please write them. If not I will move it in 6 months.
Tnx Future for the cut. Much appreciated. I even got some 'do not' threats on my talk page. :-) (Toci (talk) 18:09, 18 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Cause he was famous for what he was and what he did under the name Gyorche Petrov, not under his original name. It'd be like moving Madonna to "Louise Veronica Ciccone" --Laveol ^T 18:29, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My first reaction upon seeing "Georgi Petrov Nikolov" was "who the hell is this guy and why do I have his article in my watchlist?!" I appreciate your desire for a compromise, but Wikipedia does not have a policy of using "real names". Rather, we use the most popular name the person is known under. Also, I fail to see what the big deal about Gjorce (shouldn't that be Gjorče, not Ѓорце?) and Gyorche is. And the claim that most readers of this article are Macedonian is just plain false, not to mention it has no relevance to the content. Wikipedia does not cater for a specific ethnic group.

By the way, referring to my friendly advice as a "threat" (which it obviously is not) is not exactly assuming good faith. Wikipedia has a no-no policy on threats (whether legal or personal), so that word should be used carefully.

I don't honestly believe you're trying to discredit me in any way. It's just that avoiding such language will actually do wonders to the discussion. I really enjoy discussing and making a point, but I'm easily put off by emotional remarks :) Best, Todor →Bozhinov 18:59, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Google hits do not refer to the football team and the municipality only. There are equally refering to Gjorce Petrov as revolutionary. Even by foreign author. You will see many transcriptions of Gjorce in the English literature. I think that Gyorche in Bulgarian POV. I got immediately 2 Bulgarian editors writing strongly for.

Gjorce is not Madona, btw. His true name, then his widely known name will fix the neutrality with the name. It is reasonable. People will be informed about his born name, then choose a Bulgarian or Macedonian transcription. Looks more neutral to me then reading Bulgarian transcription, then his true name. Don't you think?

I find any emphasis on 'do not' or 'do' aggressive. Especially when is personally to me, in my talk. Combined with words like we don't need to have move war over a letter I see as treat. Because if I do, there will be move war and reverts. That is the intention of your message directly to me. Isn't it?

I do not discredit anyone, just it is important to have the both POV in Wikipedia for neutrality. One Macedonian editor is same and hundred Bulgarian and opposite hunderd Macedonian are same as one Bulgarian if they present POV. We will wait for a cut from someone who is not Bulgarian or Macedonian. If not I think Google relevance should decide. Google is global filter of interest. (Toci (talk) 06:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I performed the move because a user from the Netherlands requested it. Anything else? --Laveol ^T 10:10, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not acceptible, sorry, due to POV. He has not read my reasons of more neutral title. I doubt that he will defend your POV. (Toci (talk) 17:52, 20 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I suppose I'm the "user from the Netherlands". I don't think this naming discussion is about neutral point of view. A name can't be 100% neutral, it's always (and preferably) in one language. See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Article naming. The article title should reflect English usage. In my discussion with TodorBozhinov above we picked the form "Gyorche Petrov" because it's used in two studies by native English speakers. I don't know where the "Nikolov" part comes from, the quoted authors don't use it. Markussep ^Talk 20:10, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Basically Georgi Petrov Nikolov is his birth name. He's famous with the name Gyorche Petrov. None of the authors discussing the topic uses his whole name since it's not typical to use all of their names a person (from Slav or any other background) has. It's not typical for Wikipedia as well. We already tried to explain that the question is not about that POV or another, but about wiki-guidelines and rules. I see it's been to no avail.

Sorry about referring to you as the "user from the Netherlands". I hope no offence is taken, cause I certainly didn't mean any. I'm familiar with some of your edits and performed the move after reading your and Todor's comments. Since Toci wanted a third-party opinion I just noted that there's already such an opinion here. He pointed that as a reason for his unwillingness to accept the current naming, but it turns out that the problem is different. --Laveol ^T 21:40, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that Toci doesn't like Gyorche Petrov because he perceives it as "too Bulgarian", and in his opinion Petrov was not Bulgarian. There is no actual discussion and no sensible arguments are provided. Todor →Bozhinov 06:29, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not offended at all, your characterization was completely accurate ;-) Just curious, both "Petrov" and "Nikolov" look like family names to me. Is one of them a patronymic, or is it like in Spain (father's family name and mother's family name)? Markussep ^Talk 09:24, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've always wondered how he got famous with that exact name. Petrov is a patronymic since his father was Petar Nikolov, but people in both Bulgaria and the Republic of Macedonia usually use their family name when introducing themselves. First name and patronymic is characteristic for Russian (имя и отчество). But this is the name under which he got into history. And eventually the name that was engraved on his grave. --Laveol ^T 10:46, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No name of Dutch painters for example is transcribed with Y instead of J. (Abraham van Beijeren does not redirect to Abraham van Beyeren in Wikipedia). It does not reflect English usage. Why transcribe and redirect the Macedonian names? In this case it coicides with the Bulgarian transcription as well. So it is POV. That is why the Bulgarian editors are so eagered to keep it. There is no need to transcribe Gjorce into Gyorche. But to make the things neutral I wrote even Georgi will do. If Gyorche is kept we should redirect all Dutch, Czech, everyone that uses j in the names into something that is easily read by the English. How logical is that?
Using j instead of y is not new in the Slavic languages. The first Macedonian alphabet was latin. It originate from the 1920s and uses kj, gj, nj, lj for ќ, ѓ, њ, љ. Today we use the same transcription opposite of Bulgarian and Russians that prefer y because they do not have j in their alphabets. So the transcription is not invented recently. There is an upgrade of the Macedonia latin alphabet from the 1940s, but it was never used eithet is used. We strangely use this old latin transcription without writing carons ž, š, č, (ж, ш, ч) and z, s, c, (з, с, ц) are not competitive vocals in Macedonian language. Toci is never Точи, but Тоци in the reading. Toci as Точи sounds too hard and Gjorce as Ѓорце is too soft. Toci is shortening both from Todor or Stojan.
Gjorce Petrov was not Bulgarian in my opinion. He is born in Republic of Macedonia and fought for autonomous Macedonia as his memoirs say. He was killed by pro-Bulgarian wing of the Macedonian Revolutionary Organization. He was declared as Bulgarian in his Bulgarian school. Bulgarians did that when they had the power. My grandad was declared Bulgarian during the World War II when Bulgaria occupied Republic of Macedonia. The Bulgarian fashists have named that process as 'education' and divided the Macedonians on 'hopefull Bulgarians' and 'non hopefull Bulgarians'. Kiro Gligorov, the first president of Republic of Macedonia was a 'hopefull Bulgarian', my grandad was 'non hopefull Bulgarian'. It was a war and in war you do not get to write your ethnicity freely, especially under a treat of your life. Bulgarian fashists used to torture and kill for that. Macedonians often get fashist flashes (a repeats of the World War I and World War II history) when there is Bulgarian transcription exchanging Macedonian. Especially when even today Bulgarians deny the existence of Macedonians as ethnicity and refer to it with regional distinction.
So keep the neutrality by giving short information about his life without interpretations like 'At the end of the war he was one of the initiators of the formation of a Provisional Government by the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO), and this government set the task of defending the positions of the Bulgarians in Macedonia at the Paris Peace Conference (1919-1920)'. If Gjorce is too Macedonian for the Bulgarian editors, Georgi is acceptible. Gyorche as root is not.
Macedonians introduce themselves with the first name. We have first name, last name and kin name. The kin names are localy used. The last name is not very important, it was changable due to many occupations in the last century and lots of renamings. The kin names end on -ov (if its a single male reference) -in (if its a single female reference) or -ski and -evci (if its plural reference). Gjorce had another kin name that can be searched for. Gjorce Petrov was simply known as Gjorce. Even in Skopje, Gjorce means Gjorce Petrov, as municipality, or even more gentle in the municipal slang Dzorce (that is dž or џ, not dz or ѕ). Something like 'Georgi Petrov, known as Gjorce Petrov or Gyorche Petrov' will suffice in the article. (Toci (talk) 00:28, 22 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I won't be reading any future anti-Bulgarian revelations, so keep those to yourself. To me, this discussion is not just over: it never really was. Todor →Bozhinov 14:59, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was writing against fashist Bulgaria and their methods of 'education' of Macedonians during World War II. It is not anti-Bulgarian, it is Macedonian POV. I am explaining why we find the bulgarization trend in Wikipedia unapropriate.

To the topic. What should we do with the j-spelling and the English usage? (Toci (talk) 17:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Not having any arguments left does not mean you should resort to such nonsense. Since all your concerns and questions were duly addressed, I don't see why I should continue reading such low stuff. Thanks for the time and if you really wanna participate in a discussion in the future try to refrain from such comments. I don't see why you even start discussing Dutch painterrs. I think you might've understood something wrong (or maybe the whole concept of the discussion and Wikipedia as a whole). --Laveol ^T 17:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain what is low stuff? The poor quality of the article and the Bulgarian POV interpretations of Bulgarian references? Or my persistance to improve the neutrality of the article? You have the Google searches against you on the name. You have the explanation about the common Macedonian latin transcription (the j and y issue) and the neutrality perspective. It is same situation as the Dutch or Swedish articles. We cant rename the Swedish Jan's and Jakob's into Yan's and Yakob's. Do I have your consent to move the article in Gjorce Petrov or in Georgi Petrov? (Toci (talk) 18:29, 22 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

No. Todor →Bozhinov 21:12, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was asking for someone with NPOV. Your POV is obvious.

The capital of Republic of Macedonia is Skopje. It also does not reflect the English usage. There are millions examples both in Macedonian transcriptions and many other languages. Gjorce Petrov is born in Republic of Macedonia. (Toci (talk) 21:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

If the name does not reflect English usage, you might need to star a discussion about moving the page there as well. Will you? And where was he born again (try using English, please). --Laveol ^T 21:26, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefered that it will be Makedonija instead of Macedonia, but the English took the Latin transcription. It is Sweden instead of Sverige as well. But that level is international. No Swedish is renamed to fit the English usage. The English know that the Swedish like their transcription, we also like ours. That is it.

I will be a bit stereotyping, but in Macedonian stories the most interesting thing about Bulgarians is their stubbornness. Most colorful proverb is (in English) 'That hole is not a hole' (I hope that you have heard it). It is impossible to shift a Bulgarian POV. That is why I am not asking for one. There is no need of strong or emphasised text, that looks like some kind of deeply thought irony, if you have nothing to comment on. Peace.

Laveol has already consented on the article above. Like 1-2y ago. The name was no problem then and the article content is more or less the same. I, as Macedonian editor (I am a bit late because I was busy in my life, but I am back) do not consent on the name move since I find it ilogical. Probably as 95% the people in the Google search. If Markussep does not reply (I have written in his talk page) we will have to move this page to the last consented date. Sorry. We wait for a NPOV reply. If there is not, the move is imminent. (Toci (talk) 17:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Yeah, please don't bother us with your racist stories anymore or I'll be reporting you. Moving the article contrary to consensus will achieve nothing because all the feedback you would get is a revert, I fear. Todor →Bozhinov 17:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I already gave my two preferred options for the article title above: either "Gyorche Petrov", or "Gjorče Petrov". One is the standard transliteration (within Wikipedia) of his Bulgarian name, the other of his Macedonian name. Markussep ^Talk 18:40, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, boy, Toci, you've missed the whole point by a mile. Sorry, you're not an authority or something. You're not in a position to impose anything. And nothing is imminent. Are you by any chance under the impression that this is some sort of a game or maybe a Hollywood action movie? I'll surely be thinking so if your next comment is along the lines of "Resistance is futile". When you've lost an argument, you've lost it. And quit the racist bullshit, really. You're worth of a block already. --Laveol ^T 19:30, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It has been a while and there was no argument against moving this page to Gjorče Petrov. The Google search Gyorche Petrov gives this Wikipedia page on the top with around 1000 other hits. Those 1000 hits are mostly internet robots that read this Wikipedia page and display the content. Gjorče Petrov gives 180000 hits and puts Gjorče Petrov Municipality on the top (Gyorche Petrov's wikipedia page is not even listed in the Gjorče Petrov search. Wikipedia is not a place where the less popular choices are forwarded against the prevailing. This page has to be moved to Gjorče Petrov where it will be shown on Google search together with Gjorče Petrov Municipality.

Please do not revert the move. (Toci (talk) 21:46, 24 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page not moved. harej 02:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gyorche Petrov → Gjorče Petrov — 1. Google search optimisation (180000 Google hits for Gjorče Petrov compared to 1000 of Gyorche Petrov). 2. Connection to Gjorče Petrov Municipality. Toci (talk) 21:56, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Don't forget to make a version without the thingy on the c as a redirect. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 22:43, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The version without the caron, Gjorce Petrov, exists, and redirects to the municipality. Markussep ^Talk 08:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
oppose And how do you aboid mixing the two? It seems like most of the links lead to the municipality. --Laveol ^T 23:44, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Confusion is easily avoided by using a hatnote or a disambiguation page, see for instance Anna Paulowna, Elin Pelin or Galvarino. Markussep ^Talk 08:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – per WP:RUS. 「ɠu¹ɖяy」¤ • ¢ 01:29, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RUS doesn't apply here, it's not a Russian name. WP:CYR is applicable, but the Bulgarian and the Macedonian version are not the same. Markussep ^Talk 08:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, guess I wasn't fully paying attention when I looked at the article... 「ɠu¹ɖяy」¤ • ¢ 20:04, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per my arguments in the discussions above. — Toдor Boжinov — 06:56, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. My Google search (English only, no wikipedia, and added "politician" as a filter against the municipality) is slightly in favour of the Macedonian name: Gjorče 398, but still many municipality hits and Gyorche 82. Markussep ^Talk 08:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the article on him doesn't list the Gjorče Petrov spelling in the first line. If this spelling is common for him, it should be there. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 13:34, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Change Well, I think it is more important to connect the Municipality, the football team and the revolutionery under a same name. Regarding WP:RUS see 7. The default romanization variant must be a redirect to the main article (to the original name), not vice versa. Talking about the original name, this article was already moved once from Gjorche to Gyorche. If you try and search Gjorche (the second macedonian translation) it gives 41000 hits compared to 100 for Gyorche. A move from Gyorche to Gjorche (Gjorče = Gjorche) will also work if the municipality name and the football team change to Gjorche for the consistency. (Toci (talk) 03:19, 28 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Comment Of course the redirects will go from Gorce, Gorche, Gjorce, Gjorče and Gyorche to Gjorche. (Toci (talk) 03:23, 28 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Comment We should uppdate the Macedonian Latin at WP:CYR, but sadly the latest Macedonian Latin alphabet was never really used in reality (the letter k with apostrophe for ќ never got included in the Latin alphabet and g with apostrophe is also rather strange). In our informal transcriptions we use a Latin alphabet that is exactly as in the [Macedonian Abecedar from the 1920s, recently re-published in Greece]. [Gjorče] as name is even mentioned there. Today we use to write č with c, š with s. The newest influence is writing č and š with ch and sh (as in English). However we do not use zh for ž that gets only transcribed in z (there is no zh in English), so there is inconsistency in the use of -h. Therefore I wrote best to use Gjorče instead of Gjorche to make the consistency in all the later transcriptions with č, š and ž where -j can be used consistently in ќ, kj, ѓ, gj, њ, nj and љ, lj. (Toci (talk) 04:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Oppose I strongly oppose the proposal. --Relativefrequency (talk) 23:22, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Can we have more neutral votes or opinions on the request? The Macedonian editors votes will always be lower several times then the Bulgarian, simply due to population statistics (2M vs. 9M). (Toci (talk) 00:19, 21 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]
Comment What meens more neutral? Maybe one example for your neutrality is as you have resently deleted a reliable reference from this article - Region, Regional Identity and Regionalism in Southeastern Europe, Klaus Roth, Ulf Brunnbauer, LIT Verlag Münster, 2009,ISBN 3825813878? Jingby (talk) 08:52, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.