Talk:North Macedonia/Archive 20

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

"Officially?"

The name is officially "Republic of Macedonia", the same as greek's country is officially "Republic of Greece". But people usually call it Macedonia, as they call it Greece. Because Greeks want to make problems to Macedonians, Macedonians were not allowed to be called as Macedonia in the UN, but it was agreed that Macedonia will be referred to (NOT RENAMED) as "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" by UN (and countries that want to humiliate Macedonians), while the country's official name is still Republic of Macedonia, and this is how it is referred to by more then 130 countries where there is democracy and respect for human rights of Macedonians (countries such as: China, USA, Russia, Canada, India, ...). So - officially it is "Republic of Macedonia"! And there is no official dispute. There is just talks about our name, so Greeks will be sure that it doesn't mean any territorial pretensions, even it never had any.

The name is officially "former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia". There is a dispute so having it listed as the "Republic of Macedonia" is incorrect and basically biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SStefanakis (talk • contribs) 01:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I have an objection about the word "officially" at the begining of the article. The country's name, officially, is "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia", not Republic of Macedonia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mercedes19 (talk • contribs) 13:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it is the official title used by the people living in the country: Republika Makedonija. The Former Yugoslav/FYROM is nonsense/a nonsense acronym.
I think "Constitutionally known as the Republic of Macedonia" would solve the dispute. Philly boy92 (talk) 20:29, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
There's no need for "constitutionally". That term implies that Macedonia uses something else besides what is written in their constitution. By the word "officially" we mean the name that the country uses for itself in official matters. It doesn't matter one bit what other countries (Greece particularly) think of it, "officially" means the name that the country officially uses for itself. "Myanmar" is the official name of Burma, whether anyone else uses that name or not. "Republic of Macedonia" is the official name of Macedonia whether the Greeks like it or not. "FYROM" is not an official name. The UN considers "FYROM" to be the "term of reference" until the Greeks and Macedonians agree to an official name to replace "Republic of Macedonia". But until then, "Republic of Macedonia" is the official name. --Taivo (talk) 21:27, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Not to belabour the point too much with you, Taivo, but doesn't that nudge the POV that this name is uniformly accepted? If it were "officially" known as that, there wouldn't be a point to all the discussion in the UN and bilaterally between the two countries, would there? Perhaps some wording is in order that doesn't suggest this name is anywhere near universally accepted?86.148.132.223 (talk) 12:17, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Something like "It became a member of the United Nations in 1993 but, as a result of a dispute with Greece over its name, it was admitted under the provisional reference of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, sometimes abbreviated as FYROM"? Bagunceiro (talk) 12:32, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
No. "Officially" refers to the official name by which the country refers to itself. That is standard Wikipedia usage and the standard meaning of the word "officially" in English. It doesn't matter one bit what the UN does or does not do. "Officially" means the official name by which the country refers to itself in all official documents. The official name of Macedonia is Republic of Macedonia. Your characterization that "Macedonia" is "nowhere near universally accepted" is completely wrong. See Macedonia naming dispute to see that a large part of the world does, indeed, use "Macedonia". And that still doesn't matter at all. "Official" means what the country calls itself in official documents. Even if no other country in the world used that name, it would still be the "official" name. And Bagunceiro, we already discuss the UN reference later in the lead and the article. It's not appropriate in the first sentence because that is an exonym, not the name by which they refer to themselves. The common English name for Macedonia is, well, Macedonia. That is the name you will find most commonly in the major English language media, in major English language atlases, etc. Read WP:MOSMAC. --Taivo (talk) 13:14, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I know. I agree with you. I was trying to make that point (probably a bit obtusely) that the article already covers anon's concern by quoting that part of the lead. Bagunceiro (talk) 16:17, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Ah, good. I misunderstood your point, Bagunceiro. --Taivo (talk) 17:55, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
I support clarifying the meaning of using "officially", because the name "Republic of Macedonia" is not internationally accepted. This is a rarity and must be accounted for in the naming. I propose either replacing "officially" with "or", or specifying with respect to what (the country's constitution) is the name official. Kupraios (talk) 00:35, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
No, Kupraios, there is no ambiguity whatsoever in the usage of "officially". International acceptance has absolutely nothing to do with a country's official name. None. The official name is the name by which the country refers to itself in official documents. That's the end of it. That is precisely the meaning of "official". We already discuss in the lead the nature of the international usage of this official name, Greece's objections to it, and the international naming quagmire that Greece has caused for Macedonia. The official name of Macedonia is Republic of Macedonia. There is no other official name. There are other terms that other countries and international organizations use to refer to Macedonia (and these are already appropriately referenced in the lead), but Macedonia's official name is Republic of Macedonia no matter what other countries wish to call it. "Official" is entirely internal, not external. --Taivo (talk) 01:29, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
  • No it is problematic. Because before I clicked here I knew the country as the former Yugoslav... Macedonia is therefore used as a short hand in the English Language and nowhere have I heard republic of Macedonia being just used. GAtechnical (talk) 15:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

There is no problem with the way the article is now, as it follows the convention used on most articles about countries, namely, opening the article with the name most commonly used for the country in English, then mentioning the official name (which for literally every other country article, is the (translated) constitutional name of the country for itself). As examples, see the lead sentences of Russia, Brazil, India, Germany, Venezuela, Greece, South Africa, Mexico, and many many other articles. There is no reason why this article should be any different. J.delanoygabsadds 16:02, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Despite Taivo's predilection for snappy, admonishing sentences and unhelpful oversimplification of the term 'officially', I do not see any problem with its usage here. Indeed, it is even included in the opening paragraph of the internationally unrecognised 'TRNC' and J.delanoy helpfully gives various other examples. However, Tavoi, it is not standard usage in Wikipedia, while in the world of international politics the terms 'official' and 'officially' are often debatable. Politis (talk) 20:54, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

No "oversimplification" about it "Pliotis" and the only time that "official" and "officially" are not the internally official, constitutional names is when the specific context is otherwise. If we were talking about the UN specifically, then it would have the UN meaning, but in general, without any specific context such as here it is the internally official name. --Taivo (talk) 22:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

The appropriate place to continue this discussion is here --94.70.87.23 (talk) 18:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Officially indeed. Neither history, what the United Nations think or how the Greeks feel about this, matters one bit. Any sovereign state can, by definition, decide how it is to be called. In this case the Republic of Macedonia. Sometimes historical and geographical definitions shift and sometimes change meaning entirely. Learn to live with that! Countries that recognize Macedonia (all in the world but one) accept it under it's own name. The UN is not a country and the terms under which the Republic of Macedonia joined that particular organisation are meaningless where international law is concerned. If Macedonia decides to rename itself "Kingdom of Cloud-Cuckooland" tommorow that would be their right. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 16:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Not if it's already existant.Better look at a map before posting here.There are a group of Greeks that call themselves macedonians for several thousand years now. Let's assume they wanted to get separated. Wouldn't fyrom(macedonia) oppose to them for wanting to call the country macedonia? --94.70.87.23
Sigh. It doesn't matter what Greece or Greeks think. If Macedonians want to call themselves "Macedonians", that's their right. No country owns an international copyright on its name. Ever notice that there are now two "Congo"s? Probably not. There are two "Korea"s, two "China"s, two "Congo"s, etc. And, in this case, there is not another country called "Macedonia", just Greeks who think that they own the trademark because of Alexander the Great. Just get over it, anon IP. --Taivo (talk) 23:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Just not gonn comment on your ignorant last sentence.If you think more about it,the 2 congo's and china's are occupied by the same nations. Not greeks and slavs,as in our case,which cannot be both macedonians.What my problem is here?That wiki has picked a side,of the country which some decades ago,after getting a nationalistic gov to stand on its feet,claimed (basically grabbed)the domain of the name "macedonia",now projecting it toward the world.It's their right,but an arbitrary pick.And this results in historical mess.Wikipedia shouldn't promote this mess.If we used the non-disputed name FYROM,we would be neutral.Currently it's pov-pushing. 94.70.87.23--94.70.72.6 (talk) 08:23, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Geographical names sometimes undergo a bewildering number of changes throughout long periods of history in which they can change meaning and scope, are forgotten for centuries and later reinstated, apply to original and later added territories, while sometimes getting out of use in the original part. This all happens a lot. Take words like Saksony and Burgundy for instance. Or indeed France, which uses a name originally owned by what are now the Dutch and Flemish. Get over it! Gerard von Hebel (talk) 10:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Indeed, Hebel. A sovereign people can call themselves anything they want to call themselves. Country names are simply not trademarked in any way, shape, or form. And, anon IP, "FYROM" is not "neutral"--the Macedonians certainly don't think it's neutral. It's an invention by the UN, and it's not even a name. It's a "placeholder" to keep the Greeks happy until the Macedonians change their minds about their name and choose a name that will make the Greeks happy. But the name chosen in Wikipedia doesn't rely on what either the Macedonians or the Greeks think. It is based on common English usage. If you actually took two minutes to survey English usage in media, in atlases, etc. you'd see that the country north of Greece is called "Macedonia" a vast majority of the time. That's the end of the issue. Wikipedia uses "Macedonia" and "Macedonians" because that's what English speakers overwhelmingly call the country and its inhabitants. --Taivo (talk) 11:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
So we will comply with the ones that abused the right of self-determination.Until this right is revised,or the macedonian dispute has been resolved,my arguments end here 94.70.87.23--94.70.72.6 (talk) 19:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't have clue what you are hinting at. How does self-determination or it's abuse come into this? Gerard von Hebel (talk) 20:08, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Meh. Just another in a long line of editors storming in here to defend Greece's alleged trademark on the name "Macedonia". --Taivo (talk) 22:38, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

The Republic of Macedonia adopts a passport that is accepted globally, except by the Republic of Greece. The name of the country on the cover of such globally accepted passport is Republic of Macedonia. Because of such country name on the passport, Greek border officers instead issue a separate "paper" to Macedonians entering Greece which in their view "substitutes" the passport, and all stamps at the Greek border are put on such "paper" which, by the way, also mentions the number of the official passport that "doesn't exist" for them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinooneita (talk • contribs) 10:11, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

79.167.154.190 (talk) 21:25, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

I thing that officially the name of this state is "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia". Well, I don't even agree with the "Macedonia" at the last of the name but we must show some respect to the international decisions, mustn't we? For this reason the title must be renamed as "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia".

Well, you're wrong to say that the official name is that. Dealt with extensively at WP:MOSMAC.Jeppiz (talk) 21:49, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Sigh. It doesn't matter what Greece or Greeks think. If Macedonians want to call themselves "Macedonians", that's their right. No country owns an international copyright on its name. Ever notice that there are now two "Congo"s? Probably not. There are two "Korea"s, two "China"s, two "Congo"s, etc. And, in this case, there is not another country called "Macedonia"...
— User:Taivo

  1. Actually, it does matter what Greeks think. Controversies exist when multiple conflicting opinions matter.
  2. Yes, you are right about two Koreas, but they are known (at least internationally) as North Korea and South Korea. The "two Chinas" is a defunct issue and I don't think you'd like the Congo solution. The naming situation with the Congos (Democratic Republic of the Congo and Republic of the Congo) is on par with the Macedonian situation ("Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" and "Provence of Macedonia").
          If you like the Congo solution, then you should be happy with no one being able to call their land "Macedonia" (unqualified). If you like the Korea solution, than you should advocate calling the Republic of Macedonia "North Macedonia" and the Greek region "South Macedonia".
  3. Of course you're right that there are not two nations claiming "Macedonia" as their constitutional names, but the result is the same if two nations each consider a geonym to be exclusively part of their national heritage.
  4. Either way, both sides have remained polarized and more willing to go over the other's head internationally than find an actual solution. As such, it doesn't matter what you think, what I think, or what anyone else here thinks; the Wikipedia community has imposed WP:MOSMAC as its own provisional solution. This discussion, which originally focused on the wording of this article, long ago slid off topic. If you want to debate the merits of opinions in the controversy, an article-space talk page is not the place to do it. —Sowlos  12:37, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I am sure that the officially name is Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia such us the [greek article]. *(I am not here to vandalism wikipedia, if i want that i wiil had already vandalism this page) --Konstantinos13Macedonia is greek 08:30, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

these noobs are recently lost from FAXAKIA brotherhood!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.6.104.164 (talk) 01:40, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Too much history on the main page

I think the history section on the main page for Republic of Macedonia is way too long and should be shortened. For example you can compare it to the articles for other countries. There should be much more about culture, cuisine and other things that give the right impression about the country nowadays and not about some old times. I am ethnic Macedonian, but I really don't see a point in having so much history at the main page because most of the "normal" people are not that worried about all that. Additionally, you can get the impression that besides history there is nothing else there in the country. Also there is a huge section about the naming dispute which can be significantly shorter.

On the other side, maybe I get that impression just because the other sections are too short.

I would like to hear other opinions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ДАБ (talk • contribs) 10:24, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Should we not have much history on Macedonias wikipedia article? A national article should contain the history of the nation.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:19, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

hronicni bolesti na tonzilite i adenoidite — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.220.208.37 (talk) 18:03, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 January 2014

It if "Former Republic of Macedonia" 79.129.4.128 (talk) 08:29, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

No. Read WP:NCMAC. --Taivo (talk) 09:13, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
The sly transition of Macedonia into a monarchy with this name bears thinking about. CMD (talk) 12:52, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 January 2014

The reports in the international rankings section are out of date. Current reports are as follows:

2013 Global Peace Index ranking - 79 [1]

2013 Worldwide Press Freedom Index - 116 [2]

2013 Index of Economic Freedom - 44 [3]

2013 Corruptions Perception Index - 67 [4]

2013 Human Development Index - 78 [5]

Wsh81 (talk) 14:01, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Sources appear to be WP:V -
2013 Global Peace Index ranking - 79 of 162
2013 Worldwide Press Freedom Index - 116 of 179
2013 Index of Economic Freedom - 43 (not 44) of 177
2013 Corruptions Perception Index - 67 of 177
2013 Human Development Index - 78 of 207 --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:57, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 Done --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:44, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

IS A F.Y.R.O.M. ΝΟΤ Republic of Macedonia

look the history about Macedonia.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.107.233.33 (talk) 18:17, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Massive copyright-violating copy-and-paste wall of text added by 124.186.96.6, 06:50, 18 February 2014 (UTC). Removed. – Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Is there an edit you'd like to make? If not, I have to put this: WP:NOTFORUM. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 18 Adar I 5774 07:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2014

Paeonians are not Thracian people as its written, they are Paeonian! In antiquity, most of what is now the Republic of Macedonia was the kingdom of Paeonia,[16] inhabited by the Paeonians, a Thracian people,[17] MartinKubelka-kuba (talk) 00:31, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Sam Sailor Sing 00:42, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2014

79.166.4.79 (talk) 10:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Please specify what you think should be changed. Be specific, what it currently says and what you think it should say. Also please provide reliable sources that support your suggested change. GB fan 11:24, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2014

91.132.199.184 (talk) 07:38, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

 Not done, see WP:NCMAC. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:38, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the section "Etymology" of the name of MY country: Macedonia I have one request: Wikipedia - PLEASE STOP your nazist propaganda !!! You can not talk about me. That is what nazist were doing for the Jews and other people (even Germans with some phisical dissasbilities) and they were telling them that they are not good. We all saw how it ended when somebody thinks that he knows more about you, then you. SO AGAIN - Wikipedia - please stop be "greek" gebels!!! Here are the facts: Our name is OUR to describe, not the Greeks to desribe it !!! All "greek" myths where they play with words are inventions (please see movie Big Fat Greek Weeding, to see how Kimono is actually greek word :).

Maybe "mak" means "tall" on some ancient language, maybe "mak" means poppy (check google translate from macedonian to english :) )... But it doesn't matter. It is not all that starts and ends with "greek" history.... Actually today "greeks" are not much connected with ancient balkan people, because today's greeks came from asia minor (today turkey) in 1923. Hellenic from 300 BC is not the same as "greek" of today. We (Macedonians) are (of) Hellenic (descent), too, but we are NOT Greeks like today self-proclamed "greeks". They are capadocians, lydians, carians.... NOT MACEDONIANS!!! But it also doesn't matter. I don't want to talk about them, I just want to point out to see (and to teach next generations) in more dimensions, then the "greek" propaganda.

Therefore, I request to stop humiliating the name of my country, and TAKE OUT that false truth about the ethimology of the name of MY COUNTRY !!! Thanks... 77.28.208.253 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:02, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done: unsourced rant. Cannolis (talk) 08:04, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2014

Change the name to FYROM (ex Skopje). Macedonia is part of Greece and not officially a country. Pseudo-Nationalists from ex-Yugoslavia try to steal the real History of Greek Macedonia.

The Historical facts are wrong based on wrong, nonexisting, false sources.

These parts must be deleted:

2.1 Ancient and Roman period 2.2 Medieval and Ottoman period 2.3 Macedonian nationalism

Ellinas1 (talk) 13:42, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

You must get consensus for changes like this. Start a discussion and if you get consensus then the change can be made. GB fan 13:49, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 April 2014

The term Republic of macedonia is inaccurate ,the official name is Former Yugoslav Republic of macedonia (FYROM) as stated and acknowledged from the World Trade Organization,World Bank Organization,NATO and the EU any reference with the name Republic of macedonia has to be changed accordingly. 58.107.117.201 (talk) 15:17, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done: Read WP:NCMAC. Sam Sailor Sing 15:24, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

The country should be referred as Former Yugoslavic Republic of Macedonia, as it's officially recogninsed. Inside the article it could be referred as Macedonia or Republic of Macedonia, but it's not the official country name.

Agreed and added as a re-request.... checked on WTO, WBO , NATO AND EU sites .... all refer to the same country as FYROM ! please change it to accurate name ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.103.0.245 (talk) 15:06, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Read WP:NCMAC! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.23.23.65 (talk) 10:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Not done: Cannolis (talk) 20:57, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 October 2014

to whom it may concern,

Dear Sir/Madam,

This article describes in some detail a country that is referred to as "Macedonia" or "Republic of Macedonia". However, I have the well-founded belief that such names do not reflect the current state of affairs. "Macedonia" or "Republic of Macedonia" are self-proclaimed titles for a country which is not recognised officially by either name in diplomatic or external affair relationships with other countries worldwide and is not referred to as such in international legal documents. The provisional name of the country is FYROM (former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) and under such name it is listed in the UN and NATO official pages and under such name it is referred to in international law (please see relevant UN and NATO offical pages).

I suggest that a clarification should be given which states that the name "Macedonia" and "Republic of Macedonia" are self-proclaimed titles. It is also fair to the international community and with due respect to international agrrements that the country is referred to as FYROM in all relevant articles at all times in wikipedia to maintain objectivity and impartiality. This is in accordance to international rulings and the wider recognition of the country by UN and NATO, not in accordance to self-proclamed names by the country itself. When the name dispute settles in the near future then I suggest that a relevant entry to wikipedia is made to reflect those changes.

I hope this helps

Kindest Regards

dragoneurotic Dragoneurotic (talk) 02:33, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Dragoneurotic (talk) 02:33, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Not done: See WP:NCMAC. Stickee (talk) 02:54, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Research on the word Macedon

Macedon is a greek word that means 'tall people'. Maybe worth adding to the article? Scholars not cited yet existent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.58.192.54 (talk) 03:17, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

'Macedon' is not a Greek word, and it is already there. Luxure Σ 05:26, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Another point of view that should be added. Is it fine if i name my country Gaul since no country Gaul exists? Gaul refers to French people and they would be angered. Is it fine if i call my country Dacia? Dacians would be angered.Mrknockknock (talk) 03:29, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

 Not done That's your POV and read WP:MOSMAC Luxure Σ 05:26, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 January 2015

The name of the country you describe is F.Y.R.O.M (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia). That is the official name and that is how it should be called. It is recognized by the United Nations as F.Y.R.O.M. not as Republic of Macedonia. Macedonia is a Greek county and that is why it couldn't be named as Macedonia when it was created. Please make the change. Wikipedia is a serious organization and must be very carefull with it's writings. Thank you P.S Take a look at the United Nations http://search.un.org/?ie=utf8&output=xml_no_dtd&oe=utf8&Submit=Go&__utmt=1&__utma=114554307.318540190.1422000016.1422000016.1422000016.1&__utmb=114554307.1.10.1422000016&__utmc=114554307&__utmz=114554307.1422000016.1.1.utmcsr%3Dgoogle%7Cutmccn%3D%28organic%29%7Cutmcmd%3Dorganic%7Cutmctr%3D%28not+provided%29&query=fyrom&tpl=un&lang=en&rows=10 79.129.115.194 (talk) 08:15, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 Not done and will not be done - please see WP:NCMAC as referred to 4 times higher up this page, and numerous times in the archives - Arjayay (talk) 08:23, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2015

You should really consider altering the article title along with every reference to a "Macedonian" whatever, thus alligning with the international treaties and the intrernationally acceptable term "FYROM". Thanks for Your consideration. Dominus72 (talk) 11:02, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

 Not done and will never be done. See WP:MOSMAC and WP:ARBMAC. --Taivo (talk) 12:07, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Coat of arms

A user has twice inserted a picture of a coat of arms 8 (that apparently isn't official one of Macedonia) and nothing else in the section on culture. It's unclear what the story is, and why it's relevant; the user has made no attempt to explain it. The user is welcome to discuss, but a non-official coat of arms does not seem relevant here. Jeppiz (talk) 21:10, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

This is just recolored Royal Arms of Belgium with added "some kind of crown". I've asked how should we proceed with that image at the Commons Village pump. It is not the actual proposed Coat of Arms. --StanProg (talk) 19:47, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

It's a mural crown. Please keep in mind that this is heraldry, not logomaking. Therefore other conventions apply when it comes to the validity of a representation. The one uploaded to commons is in fact a valid representation. I've replied at the pump. Ssolbergj (talk) 00:12, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

In short, we all agree that this coat of arms is the recolored coat of arms of Belgium, not the proposed new coat of arms of Macedonia. That being the case, it has nothing to do in this article.Jeppiz (talk) 12:22, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
The shield looks like that of Belgium and Scotland. That is how heraldry works (as the contributors at Commons Village pump pointed out). The job of the artist contributing to Commons is to interpret the blazon:
Or, a Lion Rampant Gules. The shield is crowned with a golden-yellow mural crown with five towers, placed on a golden diadem adorned with rubies and pearls of Macedonia.[1]
This is a proposal by the government, and belongs in this article because the current state emblem, in the infobox, is so controversial.
However, please don't add the image without a sentence of text linking to Proposed coat of arms of Macedonia.
--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:47, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure it belongs in the article before it has been passed, as per WP:NOTNEWS. And when/if it is passed, it should be the correct coat of arms, not the coat of arms of Belgium in different colors.Jeppiz (talk) 19:30, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Wait, people. Have we even got reliable sourcing for this government proposal?

I get Ssolbergj's argument that in traditional heraldry, coats of arms are defined by a blazon and the graphical realization is left to the artist's interpretation. But then, is the Macedonian symbol defined in this way? It seems to me this would entirely depend on how the government/legislature chooses to define it. If they say: "the new coat of arms will be the one shown in such-and-such a draft graphic", then that specific graphic is the only authoritative source, and only that graphic realization is the true state symbol. So far, we seem to have absolutely nothing in terms of official sourcing for this thing at all. The only sources cited (here and at Proposed coat of arms of Macedonia) are from that private society of heraldly enthusiasts, "heraldika.org.mk". I doubt they even count as a WP:RS in principle. But even that society is quoted as having described a "most acceptable design", said to have been submitted by one Miroslav Grcev – that sounds very much like Grcev submitted a graphic realization, not a blazon description. So, where is the actual government proposal? Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:29, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Here it is. I would assume the constitution only will specify the blazon, like most European constitutions do. If not, the Macedonian Heraldic Society has been giving poor advice to the government. - Ssolbergj (talk) 11:16, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2015

Want to add ISO Code MK for country (like other countries have) Kostenko (talk) 19:54, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for the suggestion. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:17, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Insertion of superfluous whitespace

@Arminden: There is no need for that whitespace you want to add. All it does is take up space that the foundation has to pay for. If you're having trouble reading the markup language, might I recommend VisualEditor Dolescum (talk) 11:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

On the other hand, the whitespace in question takes up a lot less server space than what you've just used in posting to this talkpage, and certainly a lot less than what you both just added to the article history by reverting it, so could we perhaps just not get too fussed up over it? Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:16, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I know. Still, Jeppiz jumped on me for edit warring and my inner engineer balks at seeing such unneeded usage of databse space... Dolescum (talk) 12:23, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
If I may, I didn't "jump on" you. Seeing you and Arminden engaged in an edit war, I posted an identical post on the talk pages of both of you, encouraging you to discuss here rather than keep reverting each other.Jeppiz (talk) 12:31, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Dolescum, hi. Please, let's stay grounded. 500 bytes cost nothing at all. Shall I use the word: disingenuous argument? Meant as an objective observation, please don't feel offended, but think about it. As I pointed out, you yourself have proven that if smth. is not VERY easily readable and comprehensible, it gets overlooked. I mean when you undid a format correction ("Small Basilica" behind ]]; right after that, somebody removed it altogether as "bad format" because of your revert) along with that "whitespace" that gives you so much heartburn. Only professional proofreaders can detect issues hidden in a crowded layout. You don't need VisualEditor and I don't either. But an easy-to-read layout serves everyone. Make an empirical test and ask 10 of your friends to look at the info with and w/o my layout, without telling them anything in advance, and ask them what's easier to comprehend. Or save yourself the time and the jokes, because you know the answer as well as I do. It's common practice, even if not used by all. // Macedonia is a great country with difficult history. I loved visiting it and I know it's full of interesting topics. Let's use our time on those. If I may suggest you one: the film "Before the rain" and how it's still painfully relevant. Or the Vlachs and their role in Macedonian national awakening in C19. Byzantine church art. A wonderful Byzantine church used as a bar in an Albanian-majority town (enjoy googleing for the name :) Macedonian self-irony and humour in general. Gypsy self-confidence and emancipation. Etc. Much richer than whitespaces, and at least some of it good for WP. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 12:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)Arminden PS: I had to copy-paste this back in, since while writing it the discussion had advanced by 3 more contributions. Happy to see where it's heading for. I like the "my inner engineer" bit. I've got some of that, too, but most people don't and prefer airy layouts.

Requested move (notification)

Notification: A renaming proposal to move this article to "Macedonia" and the disambiguation page to "Macedonia (disambiguation)" has been filed at Talk:Macedonia. Please comment there. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:06, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Macedonia which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:59, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Kosovo

User:Solntsa90, the marking of the sovereignty/territorial dispute between Kosovo and Serbia is subject to a Wikipedia-wide compromise with the insertion of a standardized note at the first mention of Kosovo (Template:Kosovo-note). In articles such as this one, which merely mentions Kosovo, extra wording about Kosovo's status is neither warranted nor wanted. --Taivo (talk) 21:45, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 September 2015

i demand the change of  *republic of macedonia into vardaska macedonia is greek

Macedoniaisonlygreek (talk) 17:25, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

I demand that you send me a million dollars. --Taivo (talk) 20:24, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 Not done and won't be done - please see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia) - Arjayay (talk) 17:32, 5 September 2015 (UTC)


The article title must be changed with its official name "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.87.139.23 (talk) 21:08, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

 Not done and won't be done - as stated above - please see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia) - Arjayay (talk) 21:23, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 September 2015

Dear sir/madam

The article title should be changed with the coutries official name "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia".

Best regards,

2.87.139.23 (talk) 21:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

 Not done and won't be done - as, repeatedly explained above - please see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia) - Arjayay (talk) 21:24, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 November 2015

Please change the name "Republic of Macedonia" to "Former Yugoslav Republic (FYR) of Macedonia". It is the formal name of the country in all international organizations, such as the EU, the World Bank, and World Trade Organization. 37.6.126.177 (talk) 12:51, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

No, we most definitely will not do that (see WP:MOSMAC. Jeppiz (talk) 13:03, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2015

Please replace all "Macedonia" references to "Republic of Macedonia" to avoid ambiguity. 5.55.107.98 (talk) 20:49, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Given that the Republic of Macedonia is the topic of the article, that is hardly necessary. The article on Luxembourg doesn't say Grand Duchy of Luxembourg all the time to avoid ambiguity, it just says "Luxembourg". The same works here. Jeppiz (talk) 20:51, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Fix tags please

Please fix the </ref> tags in the paragraphs "Declaration of independence" and "Albanian insurgency". 83.101.67.8 (talk) 12:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Done, thanks for pointing it out. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:25, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
And you for having fixed it :) 83.101.67.8 (talk) 16:32, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 13 external links on Republic of Macedonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:46, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Republic of Macedonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:58, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2015

Dear Sirs, the first word of this article is Macedonia as if the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is Macedonia, is in fact Macedonia, which we aall know based on historical facts, that it is a Greek province, therefore it is misleading and it should be erased. The article should start with the true name of this country which is former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and not republic of Macedonia, alone. You are commiting an international fraud that way through the internet and you are degrading Wikipedia's reliability. I'm looking forward to your reply as well as the correction of this already misleading article. Nikos.houliarakis (talk) 22:36, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Kiro Gligorov said it best in 1993 'We are Slavs, We have no connection with Alexander the Great. We came here in the 6th Century AD. Macedonia was always Greek.'58.165.112.104 (talk) 09:09, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Kiro Gligorov (SDSM) was the first president, but todays VMRO-DPMNE is the ruling party in the RoM... Macedonian, a Greek (talk) 09:23, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Please delete "abbreviated as FYROM" part because "FYROM" is offending word for Macedonians

I do not agree to mention "FYROM" anywhere related to Macedonia. Or if you insist on that, you should clarify and write the truth: the F-word was invented by the greeks to offend Macedonians, and Macedonians do not agree and find it offensive, similar as Negro for African-American and similar offensive words against large people generalizations and nations.


Racism (including renaming whole nations) showed its bad parts in WWII and it should never come back again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.217.127.172 (talk) 18:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


Also to mention that all 3 "references" (13, 14 and 15) do not include the offending F-word, but the whole reference "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" which Macedonia accepted to be reffered by some (not all, especially not wikipedia) institutions, while Macedonia keeps its name and uses only its name - MACEDONIA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.217.127.172 (talk) 18:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2016

Hello, Republic of Macedonia is a false name,there is not a country in this world named Republic of macedonia. To end your confusion, i do believe that u mean F.Y.R.O.M. Please correct the article as soon as possible, you should check your history books before making up names for countries. Thank you 2.87.69.178 (talk) 00:11, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

No. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia). J.delanoygabsadds 02:54, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Check here and many more places IF there is country named Macedonia?

Here is also, another sign... Just drive north of Greece and you will find Macedonia :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.217.127.172 (talk) 18:34, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2016

I suggest that the tittle of this article should include the following (FYROM) since it is the official name of the country known as Republic of Macedonia until the Macedonian Name Dispute is resolved.


Fedora Master 925 (talk) 14:50, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia). Sam Sailor Talk! 15:06, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 August 2016

Change the name to Macedonia. That is its proper name. It is NOT the former yugoslav republic. We have and always will be MACEDONIA ZontarMK (talk) 18:02, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia) clpo13(talk) 18:04, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

International law should always take precedence over commonality

Not going to happen. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:31, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This article should be moved to its official and internationally recognised homepage Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, as it is FYROM. --Στεφανος Οι Οι Οι (talk) 21:32, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

It's not and it won't be moved, and there's no international law to that effect. End of story. Jeppiz (talk) 22:11, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Excuse me but if it is not international law then you can explain what is meant by Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Furthermore, other editors may leave their views which may differ from yours. --Στεφανος Οι Οι Οι (talk) 22:19, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Other users have already discussed this at length, see WP:MOSMAC. Jeppiz (talk) 22:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
You didn't answer the question. What is meant by FYROM and when and why should this ever be used? --Στεφανος Οι Οι Οι (talk) 22:32, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
I did answer the question, I'll answer again. You can read WP:MOSMAC. That is our policy and that is what we follow. Whether you like it or not is irrelevant. Jeppiz (talk) 22:33, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Sorry but MOSMAC is pathetic, it implies we should all use the non UN version Republic of Macedonia which falls into the hands of Slavic Macedonian nationalists. Now you see why I am trying to have this discussion as I still believe FYROM is a fair and decent neutral term. After all, Slavs cannot be Macedonian since Slavs arrived in that part of Europe nearly one millennium after fall of Macedonian Empire. --Στεφανος Οι Οι Οι (talk) 22:41, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
And why should we care what the UN does? They have no power to enforce their decisions. Especially not over languages. --Khajidha (talk) 21:30, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Support the usage of 'FYROM' over the current title per arguments raised by Στεφανος Οι Οι Οι --Ritsaiph (talk) 18:07, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Don't Support the usage of 'FYROM'. A lot of Mazedonian people see this name as an insult. Only Greece has a problem with it. Also Luxembourg and Belgium don't fight against each other because of the name. Why are Greek people so feisty? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.5.216.197 (talk) 09:07, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Support the usage of 'FYROM'. I am neither Greek nor Macedonian and I only know of the naming issue by reading about it on WP, hence I believe my view is rather neutral. As a regular donor and reader of WP, I find it highly disappointing that WP took a decision that, in my view, violates WP:NPOV. Using 'Republic of Macedonia' clearly favours FYROM's position. I would prefer that WP is more neutral and adopts UN's position, which is also the only thing the two countries could agree on: Use FYROM as a reference to the country in question. Cristiklein (talk) 21:54, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • This thread should be closed. The issue is final at WP:MOSMAC. --Taivo (talk) 22:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Anyone to check the vandalism regarding the name of Macedonia?

A user vandalised all the names... Anyone? Kirev (talk) 13:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

TechnicianGB puts Turkey out of Europe just to claim that Macedonia has lots of Muslims?

Well, yes, we do have a lots of Muslims. BUT, Turkey is in Europe as it is a EU candidate country SINCE 1987 and nobody rejected their application. Check this Accession of Turkey to the European Union . Here's what happens if a country applies for EU membership outside of Europe Morocco–European Union relations#Membership_application .

Kirev (talk) 12:00, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

It is a too small thing to discuss about. It's almost irrelevant, so ok, whatever you want. Keep that there, it's just something to compare within Macedonia... Regards --TechnicianGB (talk) 16:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Title controversy

I found this on the Naming conventions (Macedonia) talk page it is on the bottom of the page "According to the agreement which greece and fyrom made in 1995 its illegal for fyrom to be called with other names such us macedonia or republic of macedonia. You can read the pdf of the agreement here http://www.mfa.gr/en/fyrom-name-issue/" Is this true ? If it is than I suggest that the tittle is changed to the following: Republic of Macedonia(FYROM) which according to the PDF is accepted by both sides therefore taking a neutral position which is wikipedias target on educating people about controversial topics such as this one — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fedora Master 925 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

No. See WP:MOSMAC, which was based on months long arbitration at WP:ARBMAC. It's a done deal until Greece is finished with its temper tantrum. --Taivo (talk) 18:35, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
It's not true. It's just Greek POV. Just follow the Wikipedia policy. Kirev (talk) 18:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Nope! And it is not even true. There is no mention of word "illegal". And anyway: an agreement between Greece and (fYRO)Macedonia has no impact on you nor me nor Wikipedia. --T*U (talk) 19:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
There is no agreement to not use Republic of Macedonia. Please do not use "(fYRO)" in any form, please. IT IS INSULTING AND NONEXISTENT "ACRONYM" IN VIOLATION OF POLICIES. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirev (talk • contribs) 21:28, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
@Kirev: My above comment was directed towards Fedora Master, not towards you. Sorry if that could be misinterpreted. But with all due respect, there can be no insult in using the acronym fYRoM in certain situations (it is, after all, an existent acronym used by the UN). I do, however, agree completely that in the current context, it should not be used. Regards! --T*U (talk) 06:43, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
No problem, BUT - it is insulting. If you analyze it deeply, if it is a proper acronym it should be FYRM. The o is inside just to avoid using FYRM (firm) as a name for my country. Yep, it is planned for sure. Anyway, the UN for its internal purposes uses only the long form. It is posted on their guidelines. No "acronyms". But, sometimes, people do not know and you'll find some mentions of the "acronym". So, if it is too long - use Macedonia. We sometimes use RM or MK/MKD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirev (talk • contribs) 07:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)


OK I accept that FYROM should not be included in the tittle because it is insulting and it is not the common name however this is the UN Department of Political Affairs official website and it uses Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia http://www.un.org/undpa/en/europe/greece-fyrom.Since it is used by the UN it is the official name of the country therefore it should be included in the infobox of the country just like in every other infobox of a country in all of wikipedia ex.1 Greece: infobox say Hellenic Republic ex.2 Serbia:the infobox says Republic of Serbia ex.3 Germany: the infobox say Federal Repubic of Germany Fedora Master 925 (talk) 07:06, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

The fact that UN uses the term does not make it "the official name". You will notice that it is not written with capital "F", but with "f": "...the former Yugoslav...", making it a description more than a name. Or have you ever seen any other official names of any countries starting with a small letter? And anyway: The parallell to "Hellenic Republic", "Republic of Serbia" and "Federal Repubic of Germany" would be "Republic of Macedonia". --T*U (talk) 07:21, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

If FYROM is not the official name of the country than why does the member states websites of the UN Have The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia http://www.un.org/en/member-states/ go down to the letter T and you will see it.Fedora Master 925 (talk) 07:54, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Fedora Master, the official name of any country is that name which is found within its own constitution, not that imposed by another country or organization without its consent. The official name of Macedonia is "Republic of Macedonia" (in the Macedonian language, of course). The name "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" is not a "name". The UN's official position, as spelled out in Macedonia's membership documents, is that since Macedonia's official name is objected to by Greece, then it will refer to it as "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" until Greece stops objecting or until Macedonia changes its name. In other words, the UN itself does not call "the former..." a "name". It is a "provisional reference" only, to be replaced in the future by a name. So you are quite wrong in calling "the former..." a "name". It's not. And, in any case, Wikipedia is not an arm of the UN. We are not bound by its habits or its rules. And just because a certain number of UN members use the provisional reference "the former..." doesn't mean anything whatsoever. It means that they don't want to make Greece angry for whatever reason. Plenty of other countries don't care whether Greece is acting like a child or not and use "Macedonia". Read WP:ARBMAC2 if you want more information about why Wikipedia uses "(Republic of) Macedonia" and not "FYROM" or "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia", and WP:MOSMAC for the final result. Let's just hope that Greece grows up one of these days. --Taivo (talk) 08:13, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Taivo I am going to leave this subject alone since an agreement cannot be reached. Lets agree that we disagree. However I advise you to try to avoid using phrases such as "acting like a child" or "Let's just hope that Greece grows up one of these days" when you are talking about the position that Greece is taking. I am not of Greek descent so I don't mind. However there are many other users that might get offended by such phrases (I am not telling you what to do but to avoid having fights with other users you should be a little more careful as to what words you use in my opinion. Don't take this as an insult)Fedora Master 925 (talk) 08:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Taivo Who are you to tell the greeks to grow up. What are you a racist and you Fedora Master 925 (talk) 08:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC) How come you  see all this racism and say that you don't mind you are both Fascists MapRat (talk) 08:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

MapRat (talk) 08:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)You are taking this too seriously plus who are YOU to criticize us about our opinions and what we say. Seems to me that you are the authoritarian afterall Fedora Master 925 (talk) 08:56, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User:MapRat perhaps you need to read more carefully. I did not say "Greeks", I said "Greece". There is a difference between individuals who are of Greek ancestry and the political unit of Greece. I have the utmost respect and fond affection for many, many Greeks. I have little respect for the government of Greece. --Taivo (talk) 13:48, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Taivo (talk) I think there are many Greeks who feel the same way as you.Fedora Master 925 (talk) 09:13, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Fedora Master 925 (talk) How do you know how they feel?MapRat (talk) 09:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

MapRat (talk)Jesus stop being so easily offended what are you some sort of Greek ultranationalist? Fedora Master 925 (talk) 09:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

MapRat (talk)No I am a Serbian however I won't sit here and see my aly get insulted Fedora Master 925 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

MapRat (talk) First of all learn how to spell ally than understand that if you are so dumb that you actully believe that if someone "insults your ally" you should go and attack them you probaly shouldn't be a wikipedian. Don't get so angry for a simple phrase you saw in a wikipedia talk page litteraly most people in the world don't even know talk pages exist. No one is going to see this and think that Greeks don't have the mental capacity to live until they are 18 years. If you get so angry about someone saying "bad things" about your ally imagine how angry you will get when a servant in a restaurant forgets to say how much time it will take to cook your dish after you have ordered it. I am aware that Greekce and Serboa have some sort of an alliance (even thought one is was and is a part of NATO and the other one was once a target of NATO and today is an ally of the Russian Federation) but that doesn't mean you should go out of your way if your Serbian to defend the Greek goverment witch the Greek people hate if you didn't know if someone litteraly said a joke about it. Fedora Master 925 (talk) 09:43, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Climate map???

The climate map is absurde!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tundra climate???????????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.237.139.135 (talk) 20:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

The geographic region Macedonia

In the begining of thr article says that Rep. of Macedonia is part of the geographic region Macedonia wich include parts of Bulgaria, Greece and Albania. Part of Serbia also is included in the geographic region Macedonia - the municipalites of Preshevo, Bujanovac and Trgovishte! You must put that also! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.237.139.135 (talk) 20:18, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Did some research. Turns out this guy is correct. Somebody please put in those municipalities Fedora Master 925 (talk) 17:16, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Macedonia link

please change ((Other uses|Macedonia)) to ((Other uses|Macedonia (disambiguation)))

 Not done Macedonia (disambiguation) is just a redirect to Macedonia - Arjayay (talk) 14:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Section on fake news "headquarters"?

I was reading several news reports this morning about Macedonia being a huge originator of "fake news" stories, if not the largest producer of such stuff on the internet. As this is a growing problem, perhaps the article should reflect these reports (in a neutral manner, of course.) 50.111.2.50 (talk) 13:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

That's funny. You read fake news reports on the internet about fake news reports. --Taivo (talk) 15:49, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Hey, my linguistic friend! Actually, no, the major news networks have talked about this issue for a while now. While the Macedonian people are, of course, not responsible, some of the perpetrators who pull these shenanigans are located in the RoM - or at least their servers are . . . 50.111.2.50 (talk) 02:38, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Briefly mention it in the media section, with sources, of course. 23 editor (talk) 02:43, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Climate map

The climate map ia unacurade. I propose better one! http://www.eea.europa.eu/soer/countries/mk/country-introduction-macedonia-the-former-2/map-2-climate-regions-in-macedonia/image_view_fullscreen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.237.139.186 (talk) 08:48, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for pointing this out. You are certainly right in saying that the current map we have (File:Macedonia map of Köppen climate classification.svg) is unsatisfactory. Unfortunately, we cannot simply grap some better file from the web, but must wait until somebody finds or creates one that is freely licensed. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:55, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 January 2017

2001:630:12:2E23:47D:151F:C948:2EBE (talk) 10:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.

Improper use of piping

There has been an edit-war regarding the piping of the article link "Macedonians (ethnic group)" in the sentence: "The majority of the residents are ethnic Macedonians,..."

The edit-warred versions are:

The majority of the residents are ethnic [[Macedonians (ethnic group)|Macedonians]],...

which renders as:

The majority of the residents are ethnic Macedonians,...

versus

The majority of the residents are [[Macedonians (ethnic group)|ethnic Macedonians]],...

which renders as:

The majority of the residents are ethnic Macedonians,...

The adjective "ethnic" is outside the wikilink in the first quotation and does not appear blue, while in the second quotation, the same adjective is inside the wikilink and appears blue. I think that the formulation "ethnic [[Macedonians (ethnic group)|Macedonians]],..." is misleading, because the reader sees the wikilink [[Macedonians (ethnic group)|Macedonians]]" as simply "Macedonians" while actually being redirected to the article "Macedonians (ethnic group)". The terms "Macedonians (ethnic group)" and "Macedonians" are not identical and also the reader may be surprised by being redirected to "Macedonians (ethnic group)" instead of simply "Macedonians", a fact which could lead to the misunderstanding that "Macedonians (ethnic group)" is equivalent to simply "Macedonians". In such contested areas, we should operate according to the principle of least surprise when using piped wikilinks.

The second formulation "[[Macedonians (ethnic group)|ethnic Macedonians]]" is better because the blue link appears as "ethnic Macedonians" and indeed it directs to the article "Macedonians (ethnic group)", which is a subgroup of Macedonians. In my opinion, in this highly onomatologically contested area, such discrepancies, even with these piping manoeuvres within wikilinks, should be avoided. Dr. K. 17:15, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

I see nothing problematic here. Neither "ethnic" nor "(ethnic group)" are part of the name of the entity being referred to. The name of the group is "Macedonians", pure and simple. Of course the reader won't be directed to the page Macedonians, because that is a dab page. Thus, the standard way of linking to the article on the group is just the normal pipe syntax, [[Macedonians (ethnic group)|Macedonians]].
A different aspect of this is that in this instance we happen to need a disambiguator in the text itself: "ethnic". However, this addition is needed purely in order to disambiguate the ethnic meaning of "Macedonians" from the political meaning of "citizens of the Republic of Macedonia" – not from any of the other meanings listed on the dab page (those are already effectively excluded by the context of this page; it's obviuos that the majority of the population in the Republic can't be "Ancient Macedonians"). This need of textual disambiguation is thus quite orthogonal to the technical need of page disambiguation. This situation is really no different from saying "The majority of the population of Greece are ethnic Greeks", or "the majority of the population of Georgia are ethnic Georgians"; in none of these cases would we want to include that "ethnic" in the link (just because there might also be the inhabitants of the US state of Georgia, for instance). Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:31, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
The dispute about the term "Macedonians" is in a different league from that of the two Georgias example. There are no onomatological disputes, cultural issues, or common border between the two Georgias so there is no confusion or need to use the adjective "ethnic" to distinguish between their citizens. To the average reader, the DAB terms, which include Greek Macedonians, may not be clear enough. Aside from any technical explanations for the use of the term "Macedonians", the use of the pipe as simply "Macedonians", while directing to the ethnic group, carries the tacit implication that the ethnic group represents all Macedonians. This is misleading. In this case, using "ethnic Macedonians" in the pipe avoids that particular issue and avoids the element of surprise. Dr. K. 18:21, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
But the "dispute", the cultural issues and all that are completely irrelevant here. The Greek and ancient meanings of "Macedonian" never enter the equation in this article. We are talking about the population of a country; how could any reader be in danger of misconstruing the term as referring to a population group that lives exclusively somewhere else? This is no more likely here than in the Georgia case. And what "surprise"? How could there possibly be an element of surprise in simply calling a people by its name? They are called "Macedonians" (uncontroversially, except in the minds of some extremist Greek hardliners), so who would be surprised by seeing them called thus, in this article? I have the impression you are falling back into the bad old habit of misusing the notion of "disambiguation" for something it is not: using textual additions and formatting flags not simply for guiding the reader to the correct referent in the most efficient way, but for "flagging up" a concept as allegedly problematic, as a sign of acknowledgment to the political sensitivities of those who simply don't like to hear the name used that way. That's so 2009; I really thought you and I were past that stage. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
I don't think you understood anything I told you about the piping and the surprise that a reader would get if clicking on "Macedonians" would get the ethnic group instead. This is indisputable. A reader seeing the wrongly-piped wikilink, could think that "ethnic Macedonians" are the only "Macedonians". Or if a reader already knew that the ethnic Macedonians are not the only Macedonians, would think: "Ha, I thought there were other kinds too." Now, I can understand if you didn't get my point about the piping, despite my clear examples. I can even understand your unwillingness to budge from your rigid position. But I cannot understand your incivility which hides behind a very thin veneer of occasional civility and which erupts at the slightest challenge to your preconceptions. You have a history of that, although I did support you when you were close to losing your tools in the past. Don't make me regret it. I will not make this more unpleasant at this time. However, leave your nonsense "That's so 2009; I really thought you and I were past that stage." to yourself and go write a few articles for a change. Dr. K. 19:18, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Huh? Nothing in what I said was in any way impolite. Anyway: yes, I perfectly understood the points you made. Thing is, I understood them only too well, which is why I don't find any of them convincing. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:36, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I forgot you are all-knowing. Dr. K. 21:53, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
The comparison with Georgians is entirely misleading, apples and oranges. There is no Georgia (region) that overlaps with the Republic of Georgia and Georgia (U.S. state). Nor are there Georgians (Americans) that inhabit the Georgia (region) but are not ethnic Georgians. This is a bit of a tempest in a teacup, but since the name of the article in question is Macedonians (ethnic group), it seems to me that ethnic Macedonians is more consistent. Khirurg (talk) 22:12, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Like I said on a friend's talk page, the term ethnic has no place in that article at all, if there is no mention about other namesake groups. But if it has to be in the article, at least let it be part of the link to the page which explains the readers why there is such an adjective. Just common sense. -- SILENTRESIDENT 22:22, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
When referring to English singer Michael Jackson, we wouldn't do 'English singer Michael Jackson', we'd simply do English singer 'Michael Jackson'. It doesn't look right having 'ethnic' in the linking. --Local hero talk 22:26, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
That's different. The Englishmen don't have to deal with any semiological confusions with the other nations or groups. However the ethnic Macedonians do. -- SILENTRESIDENT 22:37, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
That example wasn't about ethnicity - it's distinguishing one Michael Jackson from another. In doing so, we don't put anything but the name of that person in the link, with the disambiguating words going before the link. It should be the same here. --Local hero talk 23:42, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Wow, I thought we had already discussed that one. A couple of million times. I really don't get what the problem is with having it like it was until now. There is barely any difference and the wiki title does indeed include the word ethnic. Why take it out from the link then? --Laveol T 10:47, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
No, I don't find any particular discussion of this particular link (aside from some generic ranting back in 2008 over the use of the name "Macedonians" in general). And we keep disambiguating modifiers outside of wikilinks here for the same reason as everywhere else: because there is no reason to put them inside. Simple as that. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:55, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Apart from it being part of the actual article title? As I've already pointed out elsewhere it also reads kind of odd (possibly only for people who are used to reading wiki text) as if they are both ethnic and Macedonian, and not simply ethnic Macedonian. --Laveol T 11:13, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
It's not part of the "article title", it's part of a disambiguation suffix, and our routine practice is to hide those, and to instead add in-text disambiguating modifiers outside where needed. And I cannot follow your claim that it reads "odd" at all; it's no more odd than in the examples of "ethnic Greeks" or "ethnic Georgians" above. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:39, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

BTW, just for everybody's information, in case somebody were to argue about "long-standing consensus" or something: the passage in question was inserted only in October 2016, by User:Zurkhardo, without any accompanying discussion. In the dedicated "demographics" section, the corresponding sentence has had plain "Macedonians" without any modifier at all – that wording has been stable since 2010, and before that it used to be "ethnic Macedonians", again with the modifier outiside the link. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:51, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

I traced it yet a bit further back, and it seems there was some prior discussion after all (about the sentence in the Demographics section, not the one in the lead, obviously): Talk:Republic of Macedonia/Archive 17#Macedonians as ethnic group. So it turns out the passage originally had "Macedonians" pure and simple, then somebody tried to add some convoluted disambiguation, then "ethnic Macedonians" was the outcome of the discussion (proposed by yours truly, but I had honestly quite forgotten about that [2]). This remained unchallenged for years, though in 2010 some IP threw it out again [3]. So much for the history. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:23, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Anthem of the Republic of Macedonia (Instrumental).ogg

File:Anthem of the Republic of Macedonia (Instrumental).ogg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 01:48, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Republic of Macedonia. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 02:50, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Photo of "Inter-ethnic violence"

There was a photo of a demonstration, people walking down a street waving banners, &c. This photo was given the heading "inter-ethnic violence" in 2012. There was no violence apparent in the photo (perhaps the banners being waved referred to violence?). It was placed in a section of text that did not mention inter-ethnic violence and was discussing events in the 1990's. So, the photo was inaccurately labelled and inappropriately placed. I removed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunswicknic (talk • contribs) 07:45, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jun/11/global-peace-index-2013
  2. ^ http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index-2013,1054.html
  3. ^ http://www.heritage.org/index/country/macedonia
  4. ^ http://www.transparency.org/country#MKD
  5. ^ http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/MKD
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:North_Macedonia/Archive_20"