TaivoLinguist (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
::::::[[User:Taivo|Taivo]], I am sorry for my tone, I hope you were misled by my tone from my last edit summaries and that the passage is not the case? I read [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch]] "''There are no forbidden words or expressions on Wikipedia, but certain expressions should be used with caution''" I also checked [[WP:VULGAR]], it says "''Wikipedia is not censored and its encyclopedic mission encompasses the inclusion of material that might offend. Quoted words should appear exactly as in the original source. ''". As you see most of the passage contains quotes in commas, which are official stances of the Greek government. As Wikipedia is not censored this should stated in the article. On what grounds can object to something of such primary importance can be objected ? There are also quotations from Britannica and many claims are for Greek authors, there are several who acknowledge the "''forced Hellenization''" and "''severe repression''" of the minority during at least the extreme dictator Metaxas and this is expressed in the sources of the Greek authors [https://books.google.com/books?id=_TzjAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA301 Konstantinos Mousukas] and [https://books.google.bg/books?id=2NIBVfBX99oC&pg=PA215 Yannis Hamilakis]. Whatever the truth offends, must be expressed without censorship and bias in this website, the claims were reported as in the sources. Do you agree with that? This is a due weight supported by enough authors and nationalities. But you are welcome to criticize. Could you please be more concrete about the tone? --[[User:Judist|Judist]] ([[User talk:Judist|talk]]) 14:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC) |
::::::[[User:Taivo|Taivo]], I am sorry for my tone, I hope you were misled by my tone from my last edit summaries and that the passage is not the case? I read [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch]] "''There are no forbidden words or expressions on Wikipedia, but certain expressions should be used with caution''" I also checked [[WP:VULGAR]], it says "''Wikipedia is not censored and its encyclopedic mission encompasses the inclusion of material that might offend. Quoted words should appear exactly as in the original source. ''". As you see most of the passage contains quotes in commas, which are official stances of the Greek government. As Wikipedia is not censored this should stated in the article. On what grounds can object to something of such primary importance can be objected ? There are also quotations from Britannica and many claims are for Greek authors, there are several who acknowledge the "''forced Hellenization''" and "''severe repression''" of the minority during at least the extreme dictator Metaxas and this is expressed in the sources of the Greek authors [https://books.google.com/books?id=_TzjAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA301 Konstantinos Mousukas] and [https://books.google.bg/books?id=2NIBVfBX99oC&pg=PA215 Yannis Hamilakis]. Whatever the truth offends, must be expressed without censorship and bias in this website, the claims were reported as in the sources. Do you agree with that? This is a due weight supported by enough authors and nationalities. But you are welcome to criticize. Could you please be more concrete about the tone? --[[User:Judist|Judist]] ([[User talk:Judist|talk]]) 14:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC) |
||
:::::::My attitude toward this edit's tone was not based on your edit summaries. To suggest so is to disparage my long-term skills as a Wikipedia editor. Your edit is fundamentally biased in an anti-Greek direction and hiding behind "I'm just quoting my sources" is to abrogate your own responsibility to be a neutral editor. You chose to pick and use the most biased sources and to quote them directly rather than paraphrase or summarize them in a neutral fashion and with neutral vocabulary. Indeed, Wikipedia prefers summaries of sources rather than direct quotes when the original material is biased and the vocabulary offensive. Has there been an anti-Slavic bias among Greek authorities over time? Yes. We know that. But your extended harangue using the most biased language you could find in your sources is far from a [[WP:NPOV|neutral]] summary of the situation. It's not your edit summaries. It's your failure to present material in an unbiased manner and then hiding behind your excuse, "I'm just quoting my sources". That is not far from "I was just following orders." --[[User:TaivoLinguist|Taivo]] ([[User talk:TaivoLinguist|talk]]) 16:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC) |
|||
==Notes== |
==Notes== |
Revision as of 16:14, 17 April 2017
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Deleted passage
The passage below was deleted several times. Can everybody explain what is the problem, because I think, it will be better to discuss this issue. It is pritty referenced. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 06:30, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Large areas of north Greece were Slavic for about 1200 years until the past century.[1] The existence of any ethnic minorities is rejected by Greece and the government has followed assimilation policies and has discriminated against them.[2][3]The ideology of the Greek state is that the entire population should be Greek and the Greek government’s official position is that there are no ethnic minorities and virtually the entire population is ethnically Greek,[4][5] but that there exists only a "small group of Slavophone Hellenes" or "bilingual Greeks," who speak Greek and "a local Slavic dialect" but have a "Greek national consciousness".[6] Greek authorities declined to recognise a Slavic minority and provide minority rights and the stance of Greece remains firm today and the minority is called with what authors describe as an “absurd and racially arrogant notion Slavophone Greeks”[7][8], an official stance “maintaining the fiction that the minorities in Greece are really Greeks” and that Greece is a homogeneous country.[9][10] Such an inconsistent claim of the Greek government in the Macedonia naming dispute is that the Slavic speakers in the Republic of Macedonia are "Slavs" and not Greek, and must not pretend for the name Macedonia, while the fact is that Greco-Yugoslav(Macedonian) border is an artificial one constructed arbitrary in 1913 and did not in any way that precisely separated so called "Slavophone Greeks" from true Slavs. Since 1913 Greek Macedonia has been subjected to a policy of forcible assimilation and Hellenization, whose first stages were exceeding population exchanges and changing place and personal Slavic names of the local inhabitants, all Slavic speakers, especially these with Macedonian and Bulgarian identity were deprived from the right to speak their language and names at home, beaten, terrorized, imprisoned, repressed by the police,[11] tortured or exiled to camps in islands, they were subjected to inhumane methods of extermination and assimilation.[12] including war crimes against little children(gouging their eyes, murder, rape, etc.)[13] The different were deprived from their right of expressing national identity although a policy of systematic extermination was carried out against what is described by the state with an utopian demarcation as "own people". The education system propagandized “Macedonia has always been Greek” and the events of settlement of a densest number of Slavic tribes(at least 5), Phrygians, Illyrians, Thracians, Vlachs and any other people in the region was refuted in historical schoolbooks. The term “ρευστή εθνική συνείδηση” (fluid national consciousness) was invented in an attempt to grasp a non-national reality and claim that the minority was bilingual, although the members of the Slavic minority were early more often fluent in Turkish than Greek.[14]Although a considerable part resisted, the forced assimilation and extermination has been quite successful and made the Slav ethnicity in Greek Macedonia virtually extinct.[15]
- For one thing, it is definitely not written in a neutral tone. There are multiple places where the choice of adjective and clause phrasing is quite radically anti-Greek. --Taivo (talk) 10:48, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
- Maybe the author Judist (talk) can suggest some changes in text to make it more neutral and acceptable to the community here. Jingiby (talk) 13:39, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
- I can, of course, only state my own objections (one of which is tone) and cannot vouch for anyone else's objections. Fixing the tone is just step one. If others object to the content as a whole, that's another entire problem. --Taivo (talk) 17:19, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
- OK! Let be patient for several days, if there are some kind of objections per se. Jingiby (talk) 18:00, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, User:Taivo. In its current state, this text can never be placed on the article as it is a WP:NPOV violation and, if it is restored again, it will be removed without any prior warnings. Judist should heel to the administrator's warnings and refrain from similar disruptions in the future, including reinserting this biased content back to the article. In the event he does so, a topic-wide ban on all Macedonia and Balkan articles for him is very likely this time. As for the text, only some information - not all - can make its place into the article. But even that information could be filtered for its neutrality and tone. --SILENTRESIDENT 11:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with Jingiby.
- Thanks, User:Taivo. In its current state, this text can never be placed on the article as it is a WP:NPOV violation and, if it is restored again, it will be removed without any prior warnings. Judist should heel to the administrator's warnings and refrain from similar disruptions in the future, including reinserting this biased content back to the article. In the event he does so, a topic-wide ban on all Macedonia and Balkan articles for him is very likely this time. As for the text, only some information - not all - can make its place into the article. But even that information could be filtered for its neutrality and tone. --SILENTRESIDENT 11:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- OK! Let be patient for several days, if there are some kind of objections per se. Jingiby (talk) 18:00, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
- I can, of course, only state my own objections (one of which is tone) and cannot vouch for anyone else's objections. Fixing the tone is just step one. If others object to the content as a whole, that's another entire problem. --Taivo (talk) 17:19, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
- Maybe the author Judist (talk) can suggest some changes in text to make it more neutral and acceptable to the community here. Jingiby (talk) 13:39, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
- Taivo, I am sorry for my tone, I hope you were misled by my tone from my last edit summaries and that the passage is not the case? I read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch "There are no forbidden words or expressions on Wikipedia, but certain expressions should be used with caution" I also checked WP:VULGAR, it says "Wikipedia is not censored and its encyclopedic mission encompasses the inclusion of material that might offend. Quoted words should appear exactly as in the original source. ". As you see most of the passage contains quotes in commas, which are official stances of the Greek government. As Wikipedia is not censored this should stated in the article. On what grounds can object to something of such primary importance can be objected ? There are also quotations from Britannica and many claims are for Greek authors, there are several who acknowledge the "forced Hellenization" and "severe repression" of the minority during at least the extreme dictator Metaxas and this is expressed in the sources of the Greek authors Konstantinos Mousukas and Yannis Hamilakis. Whatever the truth offends, must be expressed without censorship and bias in this website, the claims were reported as in the sources. Do you agree with that? This is a due weight supported by enough authors and nationalities. But you are welcome to criticize. Could you please be more concrete about the tone? --Judist (talk) 14:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- My attitude toward this edit's tone was not based on your edit summaries. To suggest so is to disparage my long-term skills as a Wikipedia editor. Your edit is fundamentally biased in an anti-Greek direction and hiding behind "I'm just quoting my sources" is to abrogate your own responsibility to be a neutral editor. You chose to pick and use the most biased sources and to quote them directly rather than paraphrase or summarize them in a neutral fashion and with neutral vocabulary. Indeed, Wikipedia prefers summaries of sources rather than direct quotes when the original material is biased and the vocabulary offensive. Has there been an anti-Slavic bias among Greek authorities over time? Yes. We know that. But your extended harangue using the most biased language you could find in your sources is far from a neutral summary of the situation. It's not your edit summaries. It's your failure to present material in an unbiased manner and then hiding behind your excuse, "I'm just quoting my sources". That is not far from "I was just following orders." --Taivo (talk) 16:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- Taivo, I am sorry for my tone, I hope you were misled by my tone from my last edit summaries and that the passage is not the case? I read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch "There are no forbidden words or expressions on Wikipedia, but certain expressions should be used with caution" I also checked WP:VULGAR, it says "Wikipedia is not censored and its encyclopedic mission encompasses the inclusion of material that might offend. Quoted words should appear exactly as in the original source. ". As you see most of the passage contains quotes in commas, which are official stances of the Greek government. As Wikipedia is not censored this should stated in the article. On what grounds can object to something of such primary importance can be objected ? There are also quotations from Britannica and many claims are for Greek authors, there are several who acknowledge the "forced Hellenization" and "severe repression" of the minority during at least the extreme dictator Metaxas and this is expressed in the sources of the Greek authors Konstantinos Mousukas and Yannis Hamilakis. Whatever the truth offends, must be expressed without censorship and bias in this website, the claims were reported as in the sources. Do you agree with that? This is a due weight supported by enough authors and nationalities. But you are welcome to criticize. Could you please be more concrete about the tone? --Judist (talk) 14:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Notes
- ^ Ammon, Ulrich. Sociolinguistics: An International Handbook of the Science of Language and Society. Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 9783110184181.
- ^ "GREEK HELSINKI MONITOR". Retrieved 14 August 2015.
- ^ ΜΟΥΣΟΥΛΜΑΝΙΚΗ ΜΕΙΟΝΟΤΗΤΑ ΘΡΑΚΗΣ [Muslim Minority of Thrace] (in Greek). Athens, Greece: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Hellenic Resources Network. June 1999. Retrieved 6 January 2016.
ΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΑ ΑΠΟ ΤΗΝ ΠΡΟΣΦΑΤΗ ΑΠΟΓΡΑΦΗ ΤΟΥ ΠΛΗΘΥΣΜΟΥ [Figures from the recent Population Census] (in Greek). Water Info. 2001. Retrieved 6 January 2016. - ^ "Greece: People: Ethnic groups". Britannica online. Retrieved 6 February 2017.
- ^ Danforth, Loring M. The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World. Princeton University Press. p. 34. ISBN 0691043566.
- ^ Roisman, Joseph. Brill's Companion to Alexander the Great. BRILL. ISBN 9789004217553.
- ^ Palairet, Michael. Macedonia: A Voyage through History (Vol. 1, From Ancient Times to the Ottoman Invasions). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ISBN 9781443888431.
- ^ Detrez, Raymond. Historical Dictionary of Bulgaria. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 9781442241800.
- ^ Danforth, Loring M. The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691043566.
- ^ Merrill, Christopher. Only the Nails Remain: Scenes from the Balkan Wars. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. ISBN 9781461640417.
- ^ Brown, Keith S.; Hamilakis, Yannis. The Usable Past: Greek Metahistories. Lexington Books. ISBN 9780739103845.
- ^ Mojzes, Paul. Balkan Genocides: Holocaust and Ethnic Cleansing in the Twentieth Century. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 37. ISBN 9781442206632.
- ^ [Report of the International Commission on the Balkan Wars]
- ^ Aspects of the Hellenization of Greek Macedonia, ca. 1912 - ca. 1959
- ^ Wilson, Nigel. Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece. Routledge. ISBN 9781136788000.