Talk:List of Macedonian Bulgarians

Delete

This too far from the neutrality and especially from a serious text. The list includes Bulgarian POV, a propaganda that obviously took its roots here too. The people are Macedonian and I assure you there is no BG Macedonians. I am seeing this for a first time. Please be serious.-- MacedonianBoy  ^Oui? 22:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Spare us the jokes - I know you just did it passing through here. Yet, I do have one question, only one. How do you call people from the Bulgarian ethnicity who have verifiably self-identified all their life as such, but were born in the region of Macedonia? Martians? Or are you gonna say that only cause they were born in a certain geographical location they cannot be anything else, but ethnic Macedonians? Is this your argument? --Laveol ^T 23:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Please , provide proves about your edits and deletes, if no, go away! Jingby (talk) 07:38, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Please , provide proves about your edits. Thank you. Jingby (talk) 08:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

"Considered ethnic Macedonians"

PMK1, a few of those you have tagged as claimed by the Republic of Macedonia are agreeable, but come on, Paisiy? Zhinzifov? Miletich? Vaptsarov? You've got to draw a line somewhere, buddy. You've gone too far even compared to the Macedonian Wikipedia ([1] [2]). Todor→Bozhinov 12:08, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not personally claiming them to be Ethnically Macedonian; I am merely saying that they are "People that are considered to be Bulgarians in Bulgaria and ethnic Macedonians in the Republic of Macedonia". Im merely saying that they are not universally seen as Bulgarians. Nor are they as Macedonians. The tags are relevant. It is not my fault most of the list is covered. You can keep your "candy" [3], Macedonian predates that shabby Eastern dialect that they made into a language. PMK1 (talk) 12:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Please provide references that this people are considered Macedonians in RoM. Thank you.! Jingby (talk) 13:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

PMK1, can you please elaborate on "Macedonian predates that shabby Eastern dialect that they made into a language"? The "shabby" part was quite clearly just an ignorable ethnic insult, but I'm very interested in hearing about the rest. The "predates" and "they made" parts are the most curious to me. Thanks, Todor→Bozhinov 14:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Is this again based on the view that the geographical location of your birth determines your ethnic identity. I don't know where you read that nonsense, but it contradicts every scientific approach to the issue. Some of the people have never ever slef-identified as ethnic Macedonians and are universally considered Bulgarian. Calling Vaptsarov, Talev and the rest ethnic Macedonians is such a tiny microscopic POV that it's not worth mentioning on MKpedia. Oh, and I sk you, again, to quit the personal attacks.--Laveol ^T 15:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

My statement was in reference at how the Macedonian dialects formed the basis of the first Slavic literary language, and not the Bulgarian (Eastern) ones. Whereas the Turkic Bulgars (and other non-slavs; Kumans, Pechenegs and Avars) from Central Asia significantly altered the linguistic/ethnic structure of Moesia and Thrace. The Moesian recension eventually fell out of use and was eventually replaced by the Macedonian recension, the Ohrid and not the Preslav variant prevailed. What you know as "Old Bulgarian" was in fact based on an old Macedonian dialect from Salonica. For nearly 800 years the languages developed seperately before Bulgarian was standardised in the 1850s, based on an Eastern dialect. Only for the 100 years after 1850 was there any serious push to reunite the various dialects, however an 800 year gap could not be bridged in 100 years. Over that period the Macedonian dialects had developed seperately from the Thracian, Moesian, Pannonian, Illyrian etc. dialects. This all ended when Macedonian became offical in the Socialist Republic of Macedonia, in the same way in which the Principality of Bulgaria advanced the Bulgarian language, 30 years after its codification.

The Bulgarian national revival occured from 1762-1878, whereas the Macedonian one occured from c.1875-1944. The Bulgarian language had a 70 year "head start" on Macedonian, it is natural for them to have had the upper ground from 1878-1913. That is my opinion, I don't plan to discuss it further here, contact me on my talk page if you want. However saying that Macedonian did not exist pre-1944 is unacceptable and is the same as saying Bulgarian was non-existent before it was Standardised. PMK1 (talk) 05:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

And that has to do what with your disruptive edits? Even if it was the one and only truth? --Laveol ^T 21:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Please, RMK1, provide references about this people. I am shure, most of them are not consideret to be ethnic Macedonians in your country. Jingby (talk) 05:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Jingby, If you really think that they weren't considered eth. maks. in ROM, I would even bother adding the disputed tags to them? Are you seriously kidding me?!PMK1 (talk) 09:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, PMK, but some of them were just ridiculous. You need at least a straw to add this and if they have never evr mentioned they might be anything else, but Bulgarians, you don't have it. --Laveol ^T 15:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Spam tags

Dispute templates should normally not be used without a clear description from the applying editor of the rationale, preferably presented in a numbered list form on the article's talk page, in a section which includes the name of the template that was applied. As these items are dealt with, it is suggested each line be struck through. Some guidance should be given by the posting editor as to what action will resolve the matter when using section and article (page) tagging templates. Every single article included into the list of Macedonians (Bulgarian) is dedicated to a historical or living person and contains in itself sufficient sources proving his ethnic origin. Jingiby 05:55, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Macedonians (Bulgarian). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060723084106/http://www.greekhelsinki.gr/pdf/cedime-se-bulgaria-macedonians.PDF to http://www.greekhelsinki.gr/pdf/cedime-se-bulgaria-macedonians.PDF

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:19, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Neutrality Disputed

Awhile ago in the list of Macedonians user StephenMacky added a neutrality disputed tag and mentioned how once the neutrality is fixed they could move onto this list, but they never did. Because of this ive decided to add the tag and in this little thread i'll explain the issues and once we can reach a compromise we can remove the tag.

Problem 1 : some of the people featured on this list violates the NPOV in their respected wiki this includes :

• Krste Petkov
• Venko Markovski
• Dimitar Vlahov
• Metodi Shatorov

these people in their wiki articles arent label as Macedonians nor Bulgarians for neutrality so adding them here violates the agreed neutrality in their wikis

Problem 2 : missuse of the second tag

Tag 2 states the following "People that are considered to be ethnic Macedonians in North Macedonia, despite their Bulgarian self-identification." this is a terrible label and here is why:

• It assumes that only North Macedonia consideres them as Macedonians despite some historians from the UK, USA and Poland, Serbia have sided with Macedonia
• It restricts the tag so that only Macedonian - Bulgarian disputes can be used (despite some of them being disputed with other nations ethnicity)

So how can we fix this issue?

• Step 1 : remove those who's wikipedia page doesnt label them a Macedo Bulgarian/Exarchist (or Bulgarian)
• Step 2 : change the name of the tag to something more accurate, for example "This persons ethnicity is disputed see the relevant article"
• Step 3 : Add the tags to other people on the list since most of them are disputed by Historiographies

If anyone has any other suggestions please comment them here so we can reach a good compromise. Gurther (talk) 10:27, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Thanks for starting the thread. I didn't have the time to get into the issue before. In regards to the first problem, I'd like to suggest a second tag instead of removing these people. I propose the tag to be worded as either "Person who contributed to Bulgarian and Macedonian culture" or "Person part of Macedonian and Bulgarian history". Not everything needs to be framed as a dispute. If the ethnic identity disputes ever get resolved, then a tag like the one I suggested should be the standard tag for such lists, including the list of ethnic Macedonians.

In regards to the second problem, if their articles don't mention the ethnic identity dispute, their ethnic identification or etc, and if it's not sourced, then either the tag or the individual should be removed from the list, but they can be restored here if sources are found. I already have removed the tag before of people where the ethnic identity dispute wasn't verified in their respective articles. StephenMacky1 (talk) 11:06, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree that with this new tag it could be somewhat of a good balance but the problem is they are still in the list for "Macedo Bulgarians" some of these (like Krste P.) are also in the Macedonian (ethnic group) lists, so i propose a new tag idea, instead of it being "person who contributed to Bulgarian and Macedonian Culture" it can be "Person who also had Macedonian identifications" since that way its more balanced out

as for the second issue i don't understand the phrasing so much (personally i think thats my fault, english is my third language so forgive me) but are you trying to suggest that the tag should only be changed if there are sources to support it? sorry if i misread it or misunderstood it, feel free to correct me if i was wrong with my interpretation. Gurther (talk) 13:57, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

What I meant is that we should maintain verifiability too. If someone's ethnic identity is disputed, then this needs to be verifiable from their respective article too. In regards to the tag, I've been wondering if we should have one or two tags. The tag should definitely be changed though. So I'll let others comment here and see what they prefer (1 or 2 tags, which wording and etc). StephenMacky1 (talk) 14:45, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea, and i agree that we should wait for others to also comment their opinions so we can reach a more widely agreed compromise. Gurther (talk) 14:54, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

I think we could just use the same tag we use at List of Macedonians (ethnic group) ("Ethnic identity disputed. See the relevant article."). --Local hero ^talk 17:22, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

yea that was my original plan for tag 2 and tag 1 (we can merge them both if we use your idea) but i dont know what we should do with Krste, Vlahov, Markovski and others who aren't labeled as Macedono-Exarchs in their pages, i think the best solution for them is a seperated tag saying "had Macedonian self declarations" or just outright removing them Gurther (talk) 18:12, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Some of these articles need NPOV work. By the way, do you have any sources that Mihailov's and Buneva's ethnic identities are disputed? I have no information that either are disputed. For example, Mihailov is described as a person who fought for an independent Macedonia as a second Bulgarian state in the Macedonian Encyclopedia (see page 971), while Buneva was claimed as a Macedonian only by patriotic associations and one historian, but it appears to be a fringe view. StephenMacky1 (talk) 17:03, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, i also discovered that the Macedonian wikipedia also doesn't label Ivan Mihailov as a Macedonian, because of this and since these claims fall under fringe views ill remove the tag for both. Gurther (talk) 17:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Just focus on what the sources say. Any other concerns with NPOV in this article? If not, then the POV tag can be removed. StephenMacky1 (talk) 15:57, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

For now the neutrality seems to be fixed, you can remove the tag. Gurther (talk) 13:13, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Entries

Hello TzCher. Please make a case here. You said that Georgievski and Garvanliev meet the criteria because they have claimed a Bulgarian origin. The definition in the article Macedonian Bulgarians seems to focus on self-identification. So, unless they have self-identified as such, I do not see how they meet the criteria. StephenMacky1 (talk) 12:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, by Bulgarian law, they can only get Bulgarian passports in one of two ways - either by having permanent residency for at least 5 years or by origin. The procedure to acquire citizenship through Bulgarian origin requires proof of Bulgarian ancestors and a declaration of self-identification. Neither Garvanliev, nor Georgievski has lived for an extended period of time in Bulgaria, so they acquired their citizenships through the procedure by origin. Thus, they meet the criteria.

Further, I'd argue that even if a Macedonian is naturalized (though, in practice, virtually all Macedonians in the 21st century have claimed Bulgarian citizenship through Bulgarian origin), they should still meet the criteria, since this is commonly seen in other parts of Wikipedia. For example, see here: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/List_of_Australian_Americans

Many Australian Americans are Australians who received American citizenship by naturalization, but are listed here. Similar lists exist for many people with two citizenships. TzCher (talk) 15:10, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, it is possible to include them in List of Bulgarians, if the definition gets extended to include people with Bulgarian ancestry as well. This article is about an ethnographic group though, so it should probably be consistent with other articles about ethnographic groups like List of Macedonians (Greek) (though I do not know how accurate the content there is or what the exact criteria is). Per the definition on the ethnographic group article, it does include self-identification. Since they are both living people, I would not want to speculate on their identity though. StephenMacky1 (talk) 15:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

I really don't see how they could possibly have Bulgarian citizenships without declaring their self-identification, or even why different rules would need to be followed about such lists of people on Wikipedia, but I'd agree to gather more opinions from other editors and go with the consensus on this. TzCher (talk) 06:32, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

I recommended Bulgarian ancestry as a criteria because it could be easier to provide a source. In order to classify people as part of a certain group, we need to provide sources. I do not mind hearing the opinions of others though. StephenMacky1 (talk) 08:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)