Talk:Drama uprising

Source that says Macedonians were involved in the uprising

A History of the Macedonian People (1979) p. 332, clearly states "The major event of 1941 was the Drama Uprising in which Greeks, Macedonians and the various nationalities living in the area took part." Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:17, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Peacemaker67, as an Admin I kindly ask you to check the editing patterns of these two users. I run on a same tactic used on the article Bitola Inscription. In order to discredit my sources the user Jingiby, created an article few days ago, called Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour, in order to discredit all the Macedonian sources and to spread lies about the period of Socialistic Republic of Macedonia. I think these are serious steps and actions taken by these two editors to gain their POV and present it as NPOV. Please as and Admin take a look at these two cases and I'm sure there are bunch more. He even deleted the Talk History part in which he calls out for this second article.Thanks --Forbidden History (talk) 13:42, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Exactly! And that is what I'm trying to point out here, but obviously some editors would do anything to change the facts. (discrediting sources, asking for citations, verifications...playing with words, changing the focus of the topic). The same editor is doing this on every article related to the Macedonian history. Forbidden History (talk) 12:37, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Probably Alexander the Great, Samuel of Bulgaria and Goce Delchev are classified in the book as ethnic Macedonians. Though Macedonian historiography is classified by independent researchers as pseudo-science. Jingiby (talk) 12:47, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes Jingiby probably and they have sources quoted to explain why, Samuel of Bulgaria (no one called him like that, except Bulgaria), Goce Delcev, also fought for liberation of Macedonia and it was ethnic Macedonian, confirmed by his sister and two nephews. His quotes on Bulgaria are clear. "Bulgaria is a Disease of which we should not get affected"..."Until my shoulder is capable to carry a riffle I will not allow any Bulgarian officer to step inside Macedonia", he haven't fired a single bullet nor started any revolution on Bulgarian territory in the name of Bulgaria. Stop watering the problem we have here. And please let the admins know, whether Bulgaria recognize existence of Macedonian nationality and Macedonian minority, so they can better understand what are you doing here on wikipedia 24/7,365 days per year, especially on all Macedonian history related articles? OK? Thanks Forbidden History (talk) 13:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Try to keep on topic people. I am fully aware of the issues involved with this subject area on Wikipedia, FH. I have been bringing people to ArbCom over the Macedonian question and related Balkan issues for nearly nine years, and handing out discretionary sanctions in the area since 2016. A history book co-written by a high-ranking Yugoslav Macedonian Partisan commander who was in a position to know who participated in the uprising specifically says Macedonians were involved. This will take some discrediting, and spurious statements that the book also claims Alexander the Great was an ethnic Macedonian without having even checked the book (it doesn't, BTW) will just be ignored as hyper-partisan nonsense, and frankly it is below you, Jingiby. Ambit claims that all Macedonian historiography is discredited will also be ignored without extensive high-quality preferably Western academic sources to back them up. What I want to see here is sources that either support what Apostolski says or sources that refute what he says. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

It appears that A History of the Macedonian People adopts some weird views about various personalities as noted by Jingiby.Alexikoua (talk) 23:31, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't actually say any of those things, Alexikoua. How about people read a source before they make claims about what it says? Call me a bluff old traditionalist, but there is some pretty obvious POV pushing going on here when an editor makes a spurious claim about a source, then another editor supports what the first editor says, yet neither have apparently read the book. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:22, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Peacemaker67 since you have access to the book A History of the Macedonian People in question, can please you let me know what platform it is available on? As I can only see a few sentences on Google Books. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 01:33, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Sure it is here [1]. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:48, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you I appreciate it --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 01:49, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Peacemaker67, thanks for spending great amount of time to understand the problems we are facing. I will try to be as short as possible. During the Ottoman Empire, whole Balkan region was under their rule. Greece won over their independence in the period of 1821 and 1830, Bulgaria was freed by the Turks after the Russo-Turkish wars in 1878 Treaty of Berlin. Not even one single part of ethnic Macedonia was included in those newly formed states (that is a proof that the land didn't belonged to them nor the people living in the area were of pure Bulgarian, Greek, Serbian ethnicity). That is why IMRO (VMRO) was formed in a first place, to liberate the Macedonian lands under the slogan "Macedonia for the Macedonians" and to form a state. But the Balkan countries around Macedonia started the Balkan Wars, which ended with the Treaty of Bucahrest by annexing parts of Macedonia to Greece, Bulgaria and what is present North Macedonia it was all taken by Serbia. Therefore Macedonians still didn't had their own country until after the World War II. So, what Jingiby and Stoyan are doing here, not just on this article but across whole wikipedia is presenting those Macedonians as purely Bulgarians. And actually big number of our country's population and massive Macedonian emigration in the States,Canada,Australia are refugee children from Greek annexed part of Macedonia (and they declare themselves as Macedonians-nor Tito, nor Commintern pressured them to declare themselves as Macedonians in those countries). My cited sources of Helsinki Committee, Human Rights Watch from 1994, Human Rights Watch 1999, BBC report, are proving what I'm saying here and what Macedonian historiography says. The BBC report that Stoyanov deleted as "irrelevant" proves that. The POV they try to push on this article is that those people were either Bulgarians or Greeks or some third type of Slav Macedonians of Greek origin. That is why the background of this uprising also matters, because the Greek state for the first time in 1924 (pressured by the League of Nations-today known as UN), released a book primer for the Macedonian Slavs written in Macedonian language using the Latin Alphabet. That is when the sympathies towards the leftist arose amongst the Macedonian minority of Greece. Those are the facts they try to misrepresent. Here are some Greek sources,another one, that confirms what I'm saying and what Macedonian historiographers are saying. Just Google Translate the page and you'd understand the facts, that Jingiby, Stoyan and partly Alexikoua are trying to remove from this article. I mean even the Greek Wikipedia confirms what I'm saying about the sympathies of the Macedonian minority towards KKE. Google translate the page. Sorry for my long post and thanks for your understanding. --Forbidden History (talk) 08:22, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I suggest both of you read the statute of the IMRO (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Macedonian_Revolutionary_Organization). For example in Chapter 1 of the statute, it says:

"Chapter I. – Goal

Art. 1. The goal of BMARC is to secure full political autonomy for the Macedonia and Adrianople regions .

Art. 2. To achieve this goal they [the committees] shall raise the awareness of self-defense in the Bulgarian population in the regions mentioned in Art. 1., disseminate revolutionary ideas – printed or verbal, and prepare and carry on a general uprising.

Chapter II. – Structure and Organization

Art. 3. A member of BMARC can be any Bulgarian, independent of gender, ..."

Also this page explains well the issue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Macedonia#Macedonian_question --::::::::::

StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 18:25, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

StoyanStoyanov80, why are you playing now again. You are saying here is the statute of IMRO and you are posting statute of BMARC (that has nothing to do with the Macedonians and the Macedonian movement) - BMARC is not mentioned in any of the memoirs of the Macedonian revolutioners.So, don't add more confusin here we have enough, I believe. Thanks.--Forbidden History (talk) 21:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

BMARC which stands for Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees was the first name of IMRO. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 22:00, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

there is almost no evidence of the existence of BMORO, not only was it never mentioned in any of the revolutionaries but the only photo we do have of it is extremely fishy, when IMRO was created according to Petre Pop Arsov the stamp (used to approve documents) was one of, if not the first thing they created, and if you look at the constitution, no stamp, not only that but according to bulgarian historians it was discovered in bulgaria, so how did a organization who was founded on Thessaloniki ended up getting their constitution all the way to bulgaria? the only revolutionary who was born from bulgaria was Jane who wasn't even a member at the time Gurther (talk) 09:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

References

As I said it has nothing to do with MRO (Macedonian Revolutionary Organization). What some Bulgarians tried to do (BMARC) it has nothing to do with what Macedonians did. Show the statute of MRO and IMARO not of BMARC, if you think that these comments will bring some positive outcome for the Drama Uprising, if not, I don't get your point. Thanks,--Forbidden History (talk) 21:23, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

It's still the same organization even if it changes its name. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 22:56, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Then maybe you can elaborate why none of the revolutionaries mentions BMARC in their memoirs? Maybe I should post the statute of IMRO-DPMNE (they also claim they are the descendants of IMRO)-I still don't see your point spreading this conversation to eternity.--Forbidden History (talk) 23:19, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Based on historical evidences[4][5], it is believed by Bulgarian, Western and Russian historians[6][7][8][9][10][30] that in 1896 or 1897 this first and probably unofficial name was changed to Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees (BMARC); and the organisation existed under this name until 1902, when it was changed to Secret Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization (SMARO). While part of the Macedonian historians[11][12][31] also acknowledge the existence of the name "ВMARC" in the very early period of the Organisation (1894–1896), in the Republic of Macedonia it is generally assumed that in the 1896–1902 period the name of the organization was "SMARO". Both sides lack conclusive documentary evidence, as neither of these names appears in the IMRO documents but is known from undated printed or handwritten statutes.[citation needed] However, Macedonian historians point to the fact that a copy of the "SMARO" statute is kept in London under the year of 1898.[13][dubious – discuss] It is not disputed that the organization changed its name to Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization (IMARO) in 1905 and it is under this name referred to in Bulgarian historiography.[14] After disbanding itself during the first Bulgarian annexation of Macedonia (1915–1918), the organization was revived in 1920 under the name Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO), under which it is generally known today.--StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 23:23, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

There you go, you denied yourself. if BMARC existed till 1902 and MRO was formed in 1893, that's OBVIOUSLY not the same organization. You skip copying this part of Wikipedia - According to Hristo Tatarchev's "Memoirs", IMRO was first called simply the Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (MRO). Once again, I kindly ask you to stop this nonsense. Thanks --Forbidden History (talk) 23:33, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

What on earth has this got to do with the subject of the article? Can you take this discussion elsewhere please? Thanks. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:30, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Helenē Giannakakē and Andonovski sources

Hi there, Forbidden History, since you added it can you please provide some kind of image of this source that you have added Helenē Giannakakē, Peter Mackridge, Eleni Yannakakis, (1997). Ourselves and Others: The Development of a Greek Macedonian Cultural Identity Since 1912. Berg Publishers. p. 52. ISBN 9781859731338. as I am not able to verify it. If anyone else can feel free to do so too. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 22:34, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I already posted the link, few days ago. Type communist and hit the search button.--Forbidden History (talk) 08:29, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I know I had a look, I just thought you had access to the full book but I can't find any evidence from that source that there were Slavic Macedonian volunteers involved in the Drama Uprising. It may be suitable for the Wiki page for the Communist Party of Greece but not for the section that are adding it on this page. Others are welcome to have a look for themselves. https://ibb.co/pZGyRpM --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 18:25, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

If possible, could the other editors monitoring this talk page also please share their opinion on this source?--StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 03:29, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

I'll request full page copies from WP:RSX, then we will know what it says. These links are just to snippets, when we need the context. No-one should be dismissing a source based on that. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Peacemaker67 I will have a look tomorrow if it is available anywhere, but on the other hand, if there is no way to verify, it will need to be removed. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 17:28, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

I just had a bit of time, the book is available in some libraries around the world https://www.worldcat.org/title/ourselves-and-others-the-development-of-a-greek-macedonian-cultural-identity-since-1912/oclc/1171872816&referer=brief_results but there is no full pdf version. Also I searched for the term'Drama Uprising' is not present at all in the entire book (https://ibb.co/D7jMLcW). While 'Drama' is present on only 3 pages (https://ibb.co/nR0n0Vv) two of which is are not related to the Drama Uprising while one is likely not but cannot be 100% verified.

Also on page 52 in the chapter of 'Identity and Numbers of Greece's Slav Macedonians' it says "villages were divided between those sympathetic to the Greeks and those identified as sympathetic to the Bulgarians." (https://ibb.co/ZdP41TV) It is also important that Slav Macedonian does not always mean ethnic Macedonian, you can be a Serb or Bulgarian living in Macedonia such as is the modern-day Blagoevgrad province, and still call yourself a Slav Macedonian while not identifying as an ethnic one.

I would vote for the removal of this quote in a month from now if no new information comes to light from it to support the section of "There were some Greek partisans in the area then, but they were of little significance. With the capitulation of Italy in 1943 and the Soviet victories over Nazi Germany large numbers of Slavic-speaking Macedonians continued to support the resistance forces led by Communist Party of Greece (KKE) and more joined." Just because Slav Macedonians supported the Greek Communist party is not conclusive evidence that they were involved in the Drama Uprising. We can move these sources that say this to the Communist Party of Greece page. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 20:22, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

A full pdf version? You mean a copyright violation? Sheesh. That is what WP:RSX is for. Why on earth are you intent on removing books that provide important context on the occupied area and the Greek-speaking Greeks and Slav-speaking Greeks/Macedonians (I am aware of the ways various factions define and name these people, and your suggested formulation is not the only valid one) that lived in it? We have at least one source that clearly says that "Macedonians" and Greeks and other "nationalities" were involved in the uprising, and exactly NONE I can see that refute that. As I have done with the Prelude section thus far, it is important that the context for the uprising (the territory involved, its population etc) are included in the article. I am now looking for reliable sources that break down the population in eastern Macedonia and even in the Drama prefecture prior to the occupation, to add to the information I have sourced from Lemkin. As I have already said, I have requested copies of a range of pages from Giannakakē et al to see if they have any useful context. If they don't, I will be the first to remove it. If I do, I will be happy to provide quotes of relevant bits of text. I fail to see what on earth the rush is with wanting to delete material and sources from the article, unless you are pushing a POV. I am working my way through it methodically from the top, I have no connection to any of the peoples mentioned in the article so can hardly be accused of POV-pushing, and suggest you wait and see where the sources take me before tag bombing or trying to delete things. The POV-pushing here on both sides is pretty obvious, and if it continues, I'm going to report the relevant editors at ANI. In the meantime, I remind everyone that this article is subject to discretionary sanctions from any admin because it falls under the ARBEE case. That means you can get blocked or topic-banned by any admin (other than me of course, because I am actively editing the article) for causing disruption on this article. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:00, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Peacemaker67, I hope now you are getting my point, why I was citing the printing of the primer ABECEDAR (supported by League of Nations), Helsinki, Human Rights Watch etc.those are NPOV sources and they clearly expressing how those people identified themselves in that period. I have three more sources that are speaking about the Drama Uprising, but Jingiby deleted two of them - under the same reason he wants to push now for the official book 'History of the Macedonian People'. His reason was that the book was old and printed in 1968. And the book is officially released by the Institute of National History, here is the link to it. It's work that explicitly is devoted to the Drama Uprising event. I cannot understand how can Academic supported work be unreliable source for Jingiby and Stoyan, and in same time their own Bulgarian author Georgi Daskalov is quoting that same author and his book, that Jingiby and Stoyan discredited and forced me to delete it as a source.Thanks --Forbidden History (talk) 21:39, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

I am examining the sources that are currently being used to see if they support what they are being cited for. Македонците под Грција во борбата против фашизмот: (1940-1944). [Macedonians under Greece in the fight against fascism: (1940-1944)] is apparently in Macedonian and is not available in English so far as I know, so I am at a disadvantage because while I can read Serbo-Croatian, I struggle with Cyrillic and don't know any Bulgarian either. I have now formed the view that all the relevant reliably published sources for this fairly obscure event need to be included, even if they are older. I don't subscribe the idea that government-approved histories are inherently unreliable, or that it is necessary for reliable histories to be post-modernist. For example, some of the most outstanding, enduring and commonly cited academic texts on the Yugoslav Chetnik movement of WWII were written in the early 1970s. However, government-sponsored history texts may need to be attributed inline, ie, "according to a book published in 1968 by the communist-era Yugoslav Macedonian Institute for National History, ethnic Macedonians were involved in the Drama uprising" (if that is supported by the Andonovski book), rather than in Wikipedia's voice (ie stating it as a bare fact). Now, can you quote me and provide a page number for a passage in Macedonian from Andonovski's book that specifically says who was involved in the uprising? Or point me to where it is above if you have already pasted it here? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:02, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

My point was the same. I was not using this source to speak about World War II in general, but for a specific event. Of course, on page 54 and 55 he is listing the Macedonian fighters from the village of Prosechen and the ones that survived the uprising. And here is a snippet view of the page 54 in which the Macedonian fighter spoke in Macedonian and proclamation was read in Greek by the Andonios Nikolaidis. This list of people you may find already in the article, because I was forced to find "fresher" book, and luckily this same author printed one general overview in another of his books, which is already cited in the article. I have excerpt of this book (as a small brochure), released by this author before this book, that I can send it via email. This brochure was like a prelude for his Academic work, and it is called 'Drama Uprising. If you want a pdf let me know. Thanks --Forbidden History (talk) 23:12, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Ok if you want to keep this source in the prelude section that is fine however don't include it in the Drama Uprising section as there is nothing about the Drama Uprising there. Peacemaker67 just because something is reliable in one area it does not make it reliable in all areas, the sources that are contributing the to nation-building process in Macedonia are not reliable as they have a clear bias. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 23:20, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Wait a minute, countries that were fighting to liberate themselves and create their own state are biased, and the countries that were killing them and stopping them to create their own country are relevant? I think we are still living in the 21st century, don't we. I know that official Bulgarian stand for Macedonia is same as in World War II, but we are on wikipedia and please be more respectful to me, my country and history.--Forbidden History (talk) 23:26, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

I am finding this whole "my nationalism is ok, but other people's isn't" quite amusing, StoyanStoyanov80. Every country has historiography that contributes to the nation-building process (in Australia one of ours is the Anzac myth), in no way does that make it illegitimate, although there are those who question its accuracy. FH, I don't want your version of what is there, I need to be able to verify it myself, so what I need is the full original Macedonian text of the source that says that you say it says. Are you saying that it is available on pages 54 and 55? Any other pages that cover this event specifically? I don't want the pamphlet, I want the original source, Andonovski's book. If you don't have access to it, I'll ask at WP:RSX. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:34, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Peacemaker67, No I don't have access to the one on Google Books.But if you need the text in editable form I'm willing to retype any page or paragraph you might ask for verification. Thanks,--Forbidden History (talk) 23:40, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

OK, thanks. So what I'll do is request a few pages either side of these two on RSX (the book is held by quite a few major unis, so should be able to be accessed) and when I get them I'll email them to you (and anyone else that wants to look at them) for translation/verification purposes, so you can produce some direct quotes of relevant text we can use to formulate the words to be used in the article. I'll also machine translate them for my own peace of mind. Does that sound ok? If so, send me an email so I can reply with the pages when I get them. That applies to anyone else that wants to see copies. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:50, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Peacemaker67, please take into consideration all the pages at least (10), let's say from p.50-p.60. Thanks for doing this, but as I said I have his brochure in my hands, the sentences here and inside that book are 90% the same, plus I have his other book cited in the article, in which he also more or less mentioning the same events. So, I believe your judgment, no need to send me the pdf. I am at your disposal (tomorrow) to retype any parts that you might be interested to translate.Thanks, --Forbidden History (talk) 23:59, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Peacemaker67 I am not a nationalist but maybe like a lot of Bulgarians I get fired up on this issue due to things such as the Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour that is currently getting tagbombed. I agree with your suggestion that we should add say according to Macedonian sources and according to Greek etc. If you understand what I mean. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 23:59, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

StoyanStoyanov80, I'm also not a nationalist, but a person which country invented the Law of Protection of the Nation - (Bulgaria), by which 7000 Jews were deported into Treblinka, to invent something like this it needs to be well sourced and relevant. If that Law is for real, there won't be any problem to provide me with the proper sources, right? Cause the ones used inside, are playing with the words, none of them speaks of such Law. Don't bring that topic here. Thanks, --Forbidden History (talk) 00:04, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

You are right FH, the Law for Protection of the Nation is a very dark part of Bulgaria's history. But please don't start genocide denying in regards to the Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour. I am not going to tolerate it. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 01:01, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

this stuff is hard enough to navigate without branching off into other Macedonian issues. Stay on topic people! We are talking about the Giannakakē and Andonovski sources. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:32, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Update: a helper at RSX has located a copy of Giannakakē, so I should be able to look at it shortly. I have a few requests there at the moment and don't want to overload them, so I'll request Andonovski once a couple have been received. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:58, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Ĭonchev

I have requested the relevant page of Ĭonchev for verification purposes. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:23, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Here you are Peacemaker67: [2] Jingiby (talk) 10:49, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

I’ll check the book scan thanks, not some dodgy online version. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:14, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Here is it. Jingiby (talk) 11:20, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

How is that a scan, exactly? It looks like copyvio link to me. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 14:19, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

The book of Yonchev itself is called: "България и Беломорието (октомври 1940 - 9 септември 1944 г.)." - Bulgaria and the Belomorie (October 1940 - 9 September 1944 г.) The title of a chapter on p. 63 is Беломорска област, i.e. Belomorie region. Jingiby (talk) 13:16, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

That is fine, but the link was completely inappropriate. It is to a current Greek governmental entity. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 13:21, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

In the Bulgarian Wikipedia the link is the same, though to be honest the Belomorie in Bulgarian political and historical memory is the area in modern Northern Greece located between Maritsa River and the Struma River. Jingiby (talk) 13:28, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

In Macedonia that whole annexed part of Macedonia is called Aegean part of Macedonia, but I think it's far to be called/oriented by the present Greek state. Thanks.--Forbidden History (talk) 18:46, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

I understand that "Aegean Macedonia" is considered a bit POV by some, so I'm happy to use Belomorie without the link to the current Greek governmental entity. What is the correct original Bulgarian script for Belomorie, is it Беломорието? I will add a language template. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:19, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

In Bulgarian Aegean Sea is called White Sea, i.e. Бело море. The area around its coast in Thrace and Macedonia is called Беломорие. Беломорието is articulated, i.e. the Aegean. Jingiby (talk) 05:22, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Background information

The uprising itself covers less than 10% of the article. I wonder why the focus should be changed to Slavic speakers of a much wider region especially when the provided sources (Human Watch) don't say a word about the Drama uprising.Alexikoua (talk) 01:14, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Obviously I’ve been rewriting it from the start, so the background is being done first. The history of the region in which these events occurred is obviously important. Once the article has been rewritten we can discuss balance. I’ve been away for a week, will get back to it shortly. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:26, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, my mates, and Happy New Year! Sorry, but this is undue weight and fringe view. Macedonians did not exist then as a separate community. Moreover, especially in this area Bulgarian Exarchist population was a minority under Ottoman rule. The Greeks and Turks formed the majority in Eastern Macedonia and Western Thrace, before the Balkan Wars. Macedonian identity arose in significance among local communists during 1930s, but it gained prevalence there after 1944 and especially during the Greek Civil War. Please check: Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia. Jingiby (talk) 05:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

It clearly is not a fringe view, it is one of several views. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:05, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Peacemaker67 , Per John Van Antwerp Fine: "Until the late 19th century both outside observers and those Bulgaro-Macedonians who had an ethnic consciousness believed that their group, which is now two separate nationalities, comprised a single people, the Bulgarians. Thus the reader should ignore references to ethnic Macedonians in the Middle ages which appear in some modern works. In the Middle ages and into the 19th century, the term ‘Macedonian’ was used entirely in reference to a geographical region. Anyone who lived within its confines, regardless of nationality could be called a Macedonian. Nevertheless, the absence of a national consciousness in the past is no grounds to reject the Macedonians as a nationality today." For more see: "The Early Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Sixth to the Late Twelfth Century," University of Michigan Press, 1991, ISBN 0472081497, pp. 36–37; Per Loring M. Danforth: "At the end of the World War I there were very few historians or ethnographers, who claimed that a separate Macedonian nation existed... Of those Macedonian Slavs who had developed then some sense of national identity, the majority probably considered themselves to be Bulgarians, although they were aware of differences between themselves and the inhabitants of Bulgaria... The question as of whether a Macedonian nation actually existed in the 1940s when a Communist Yugoslavia decided to recognize one is difficult to answer. Some observers argue that even at this time it was doubtful whether the Slavs from Macedonia considered themselves to be a nationality separate from the Bulgarians." For more see: "The Macedonian conflict: ethnic nationalism in a transnational world", Princeton University Press, 1997, ISBN 0-691-04356-6, pp. 65-66. Per Dimitris Livanios: "Nodoubt, the vast majority of the Macedonian peasants, being neither communists nor members of IMRO (United), had not been previously affected by Macedonian national ideology. The British officials who attempted to tackle this issue in the 1940s noted the pro-Bulgarian sentiment of many peasants and pointed out that Macedonian nationhood rested ‘on rather shaky historical and philological foundations’ and therefore, had to be constructed by the Macedonian leadership." For more see: "The Macedonian Question: Britain and the Southern Balkans 1939-1949" (2008), Oxford University Press, ISBN 0191528722, p. 206. Jingiby (talk) 07:07, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

I have provided a link to the article Slavic-speakers of Greek Macedonia. It provides sufficient info about the issue and readers who are interested of background information, could receive it there. Jingiby (talk) 15:33, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

@Peacemaker: According to the same rationale we should also include the Greek presence in Macedonia since antiquity since this uprising was primarily launched by ethnic Greeks. Moreover, as part of the same rationale information about the early 20th cent. Macedonian struggle should also be included. What's also interesting is that the vast majority of Slav speakers in Drama and Serres were Patriartchists and adopted Greek national ideologies.Alexikoua (talk) 19:13, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Jingiby, do you want us to believe that Kurds and Palestinians do not exist?, since they don't have their own country today as well? What kind of quote is this: "Macedonians did not exist then as a separate community then. Moreover. especially in this area." If we need to follow your Bulgarian official politics we (the Macedonians) don't exist even today, since your country still doesn't recognize Macedonian existence and that is where you problems are coming from.Peacemaker67, quoted a Human Rights Watch Report as I saw. So, keep your Bulgarian nationalism at your domestic terrain not here. Thank you.--Forbidden History (talk) 17:10, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Forbidden History, Human Rights and historical research are absolutely different things. While in many historical topics, scholarship is divided, so several scholarly positions should be relied upon. Some people masquerading as scholars actually present fringe views outside of the accepted practice, and these should not be used. To determine scholarly opinions about a historical topic, consult the following sources in order:

1. Recent scholarly books and chapters on the historiography of the topic
2. "Review Articles", or historiographical essays that explicitly discuss recent scholarship in an area.
3. Similarly conference papers that were peer reviewed in full before publication that are field reviews or have as their central argument the historiography.
4. Journal articles or peer reviewed conference papers that open with a review of the historiography. Jingiby (talk) 18:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Human Rights is a world recognized institution that deals exclusively with the Human Rights minority reports, so they know far better the situation on field itself. What minority where did it lived. Should I remind you that Bulgaria is receiving 14 years in a row a report that is not respecting the human rights of the Macedonian minority in 21 century (obviously, you don't respect them either)? If you don't recognize them you think they will magically disappear? That we should trust your "relevant" historiographers on that matter, instead of the independent world recognized organization as Human Rights Watch is? I thought we are living in 21 century and not 1941, please get serious. Thanks, --Forbidden History (talk) 18:10, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia has its own rules. Keep to Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (history). Read Criticism of Human Rights Watch. HRW has been the subject of heavy criticism from a number of observers. In that case it has used Yugoslav communist propaganda sources, that contradicts with academic consensus for background information. Jingiby (talk) 04:18, 8 January 2021 (UTC)