Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aegean Macedonians

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was No consensus. Frankly this AfD has been so distorted by nationalist POV-pushing and votestacking that any result would have been meaningless anyway, even if one side had predominated. ChrisO (talk) 18:49, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aegean Macedonians

Blatant POV fork Avg 17:11, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete - Obvious POV fork based on an irredentist term. --Laveol ^T 17:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment - although the article has an Under construction tag it is already turning into a magnet for blatant POV pushing. I'm afraid it's used for a junkyard for all the POV qualifiers normally not allowed on the other Macedonia-related articles. Considering all this I change my vote from Delete to Strong delete.--Laveol ^T 22:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment for someone who wants to strongly delete the page, you seem pretty active on it. P m kocovski (talk) 08:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep --Raso mk (talk) 17:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Why? --Thin boy 00 @766, i.e. 17:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Appears to be a POV fork. Nsk92 (talk) 17:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep why to delete? --MacedonianBoy (talk) 17:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge (see below) 3rdAlcove (talk) 18:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment POV fork of what? JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 19:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Of Macedonians (ethnic group), also pushing a specific POV (by using irredentist terms), which states all Slavophone Greeks have a Slavic Macedonian conscience.--   Avg    20:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are u talking about Avg???--Raso mk (talk) 20:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I Have never written that all slavophone greeks have an ethnic macedonian identity. Because they dont! Only some identify as ethnic macedonians.P m kocovski (talk) 21:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What "Aegean Macedonians" means in the first place? It means the Macedonians who come from "Aegean Macedonia" (an already controversial term). Well it happens that there are 2.5 million people in "Aegean Macedonia" who are Greeks. They should also be "Aegean Macedonians", but they're not even mentioned to your article. Anyway, forgetting that, you've started an article detailing the Slavic migration to Macedonia and the Slavic culture in Macedonia, thereby automatically creating the connection that all Slavophones = Ethnic Macedonians. And on top of that you put in the mix dubious figures, controversial claims, irredentist beliefs. So to sum it up: POV fork.--   Avg    22:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is a regional identifier used by ethnic macedonians to distinguish themselves from other ethnic macedonians. Greeks use the term Greek Macedonian, ethnic macedonians use the term Aegean Macedonian. AND no i am not implying that all the slavophone greeks identify as macedonians, the fact that they share a similar culture and heritage to the ethnic macedonians is UNAVOIDABLE. That is no reason delete an article because they have similarities to another group of people! Dubious figures, go and have a look at the many greek pages and then tell me about dubious figures. Oh, and if i was being irredentist there would be 1,000,000 ethnic macedonians in greece, that is irredentist.P m kocovski (talk) 22:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since you mentioned it, Greeks use the term "Macedonian" and not "Greek Macedonian". This is how they identify themselves. Please have a look at Macedonia (terminology) if you have doubts about it. Now the primary reason to delete this article is that it was created to bypass the established NPOV in Ethnic Macedonians and Slavophone Greeks articles, since it uses data that was debunked/unacceptable in the relevant articles, plus it uses offending and controversial terminology.--   Avg    22:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete blatant POV fork. --Tsourkpk (talk) 22:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete POV-fork Reaper7 (talk) 22:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep ; anything to do with ethnic macedonians in greece seems to be POVP m kocovski (talk) 07:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Greek users: If you think a rename is needed, get a consensus. If it looks POV, discuss it and edit. Don't just try to delete it because it "offends" you. Articles are meant to be written in summary style anyway. Laveol: cut the crap - Bulgarians use this term too; it isn't irredentist. Balkan Fever 10:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a renaming matter. It's pure POV pushing. No wonder that only Slavomacedonian editors vote "Keep".-- Avg 12:11, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Terms such as "Aegean Macedonians" and "Aegean Macedonia" are Slavomacedonian nationalistic terms used to refer to the region of Macedonia in Greece, in the context of a United Macedonia. The Cat and the Owl (talk) 11:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment No, "Aegean Macedonia" is used in Serbian and Bulgarian. Unless you are accusing Serbs and Bulgarians of being nationalists. And no, in the Macedonian language, "Aegean Macedonia" is used regardless of a so-called "United Macedonia context". Hard for a Greek nationalist such as yourself to understand, I know. Balkan Fever 12:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Do you see me using it? What crap should I be cutting since this is what I think of the term's use in English?--Laveol ^T 13:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Naming, actually it is a term used Slavic peoples, and Bulgarians! and Serbs and Croats. It is not ethnic macedonian propaganda.P m kocovski (talk) 12:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - It is irrelevant what's the term in any language except English. And if any non-English language terminology should be used for people located in Greece, then it should be Greek, so you know the drill...-- Avg 12:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - In other words, it's a generic South Slavic term conceived by countries (Yugoslavia and Bulgaria) that never wanted Macedonia to be part of Greece in the first place. I'm sure it doesn't have irredentist connotations for the Serbs who use it today (do they really prefer it over Грчка Македонија?), but its original intention can hardly be overlooked. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· (talk) 12:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:POVFORK. Niko Silver 12:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, possibly merge. The group exists, even if by some accounts its remnants in Greece itself may be small. Not a POV fork of Macedonians (ethnic group), because it deals with a subgroup of the latter. Not a POV fork of Slavophone Greeks, because that one deals with those Slavophones who opted for a Greek national identity, therefore constituting a different group even though mutual delimitation may be fleeting. Wikipedia precedent is to allow articles on national minority groups. Naming is not prima facie an obvious problem because this is certainly their self-identifying term. Predominant usage in English can be checked and reconsidered. Merging with Slavophone Greeks is an option, possibly under a third title, if both national identifications can be treated fairly in one. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The topic is covered already in three different articles: Macedonians_(ethnic_group)#Greece, Minorities_in_Greece#Christian_Orthodox_Slavophones, Slavophone Greeks. So this is clearly a content fork. This can easily be attested by the level of data that is duplicated in this article. Now it is also a POV fork, since it uses the irredentist term "Aegean" (see Aegean Macedonia), plus it attributes population figures for Slavophone Greeks to ethnic Macedonians, plus it attributes ethnic Macedonian diaspora figures again to this very subgroup, plus it considers as "Aegean Macedonians" people that their ethnicity is either Greek (see Kostas Novakis) or disputed (see Krste Misirkov), which clearly shows that there is an agenda behind this article. Again, this is a prime candidate for deletion. -- Avg 16:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The coverage in Minorities in Greece and in Macedonians (ethnic group) is a canonical example of summary article / detail article structure; the very fact that these two summary articles need to treat the topic is a good reason to factor it out into a single detail article. The Slavophone Greeks article has the problem that, by its very title, it seems to exclude the group in question from its own scope. If it is to serve as a treatment of the whole Slavophone group, including those members who actually do identify as Macedonians (and their diaspora reflections), it badly needs its title changed. If that can be done, I'm all for merging the new Aegean Macedonians article back into it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That wouldn't be a bad idea, at all. I'm all for it. Let's hope that our Macedonian editors will show some good faith and not dismiss sources shown in previous talk pages while trying to create a new article spiced with their own brand of POV, though... 3rdAlcove (talk) 09:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you agree with this option, perhaps you could add it ("... or merge") to your vote above, to help the closing admin keep track? Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:52, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete POV fork as stated above. _{El Greco}^(talk) 21:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 15:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The term appears to be used based on a google test. This appears to be an IDONTLIKEIT nomination ([1]), and I think that's what most of the keep and delete votes seem to be quickly stacking up to. The article is also brand new and hasn't had any time to evolve. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 22:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment How exactly is this a case of IDONTLIKEIT? --Tsourkpk (talk) 22:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please show the google test and state independent (not Slavic Macedonian) sources. Note: Sites like macedonia.org and makedonija.info that show on top of google results are NOT independent sources :-) The term is used solely in a Slavic Macedonian context and it is offensive to Greeks (and this is one of the reasons they use it). Also can't quite understand what seems to be the issue with the diff? The part where I notify Kocovski that I'm quickly putting this to AfD? Rest assured he knows more than me that this is a POV fork. How you link this to WP:IDONTLIKEIT I cannot understand. I gave specific reasons, examples and the context of this issue. A WP:POVFORK article is a legitimate reason for deletion.-- Avg 23:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Google hits; g-books hits; g-scholar hits. Term appears to be widely used. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 02:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I mentioned that the issue is by whom and for what reason it is used. I actually checked the links, did you? This is the core of why it is POV fork. I've never claimed this term does not exist. It exists, for a reason. -- Avg 02:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AVG, please. The term is used solely in a Slavic Macedonian context this is wrong, as balkan fever and myself have pointed out. The term is not used by ethnic macedonians only, but as well as serbs, bulgarians, croats. Other references are by Poles, Swedes, Czechs, Bosnians, Slovenians, Occitans, Catalans, Spainards and many others (on the actual, or disambiguation page). It is clearly not a term used by only ethnic macedonians, but an alternative term used by many people including english speakers. So your nationalistic/irredentist argument is baseless. P m kocovski (talk) 06:29, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Apparently, neutral sources are kryptonite to Greeks. Köbra ^Könverse 08:32, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Is there a voting option for "Keep your inane comments to yourself"? 3rdAlcove (talk) 09:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Avg, you keep on talking about the title being offensive to Greeks. Assuming this is not some more bullshit from your side: the title can be changed. There is a discussion going on at the talk page of the article - funny how you won't contribute. If you have a problem with the fact that there is a (small) ethnic Macedonian minority in Greece, well then you can't be helped. Balkan Fever 11:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Save the weasel words and insults for yourself. This is a content fork with a POV title, POV content, using references from propaganda sites. So it is a POV fork. Simple as that. Obviously I have no intention to contribute to a POV fork.-- Avg 17:32, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge to a neutrally named article, one that doesn't use the term "Macedonian" in a way that is alien to the context of Greece. "Aegean Macedonians" is simply too laden with political baggage, not to mention ambiguity - if "Aegean Macedonia" is the established South Slavic term, isn't it logical to assume that "Aegean Macedonians" refers to the region's (overwhelmingly ethnic Greek) population, including the Slavophones who in their majority self-identify as (a different kind of) Macedonians? ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· (talk) 11:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting point. Have you ever met a greek from macedonia who identifies as an Aegean Macedonian.??P m kocovski (talk) 11:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't met anyone who identifies as an "Aegean Macedonian", full stop. That's not the point. Who lives in "Aegean Macedonia", if not the "Aegean Macedonians"? How do you expect to maintain an article on the latter that excludes practically the entire population of the former? ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· (talk) 12:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well if not, then the greeks cant be called that. This is what people are not understading, Aegean Macedonian refers to the Ethnic Macedonian people in Greek/Aegean Macedonia while Greek Macedonian refers to the Greek population of all of Macedonia. I have also added at the top of the article not to be confused with greek Macedonians, to address such concerns. P m kocovski (talk) 12:22, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At least put your propaganda terminology in order. In this very article you claim some population figures for "Aegean Macedonians" in Australia, excluding those "Aegean Macedonians" who identify as Greeks [2]. So why don't you decide first who are the "Aegean Macedonians"?-- Avg 17:56, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AVG, Peter Hill has used a source which bases estimates on a combination of things. One is the loss of population in the Florina/Kastoria/Edessa area (eg. Emigration). He refers to what you call a Slavophone Greek as a person with Macedonian Origin but a Greek Self Conciousness. He removes a large proportion of his estimate, because those people do not identify as Ethnic Macedonians. It is a bit hard to claim that he is full of propoganda!, his work is readily accepted all over the world for not being biased!. If you would like further clarification i can give you the context in which it is used. You are quick to lay allegations of POV and bias but when it comes down to the wire, are they viable?P m kocovski (talk) 05:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article should not be deleted. First it has references, and second it is analogical to the article Pontic Greeks. Second, about the naming it can be Ethnic Macedonians of Greece, because it shows that is it not only about those that still live in Greek Macedonia, but also in Republic of Macedonia, Canada and so on. P.S. If you delete Aegean Macedonians than you may as well delete Pontic Greeks, for the articles are analogical. Regards. --Revizionist (talk) 12:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Obvious POV fork Kapnisma ? 15:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete The usual semantic travesty cheered solely by the Slavic peoples inhabiting what was once Yugoslavia. A travesty that cannot continue to be ignored. ktr (talk) 18:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article is well sourced with academic references, Greeks have to wake up in the 21 century and recognize the Macedonian nation like the rest of the world has done. Polibiush (talk) 00:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - today, all scholars and academic resources, including Britannica, use the term "Aegean Macedonia". There is no propaganda in this article. The article should stay. Alekishere (talk) 00:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Greeks don't even recognize the Macedonian Nation, so of course they won't recognize a Macedonian sub-group. But why should their nationalistic and racist policies be dragged onto Wikipedia???? Kadeshli (talk) 00:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My, the tenor of the comments from the Slavic users is increasing in shrillness with each "new" user. Why do these people feel they have to accompany their vote with a mini-rant? --Tsourkpk (talk) 01:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We are not slavic users, we are MACEDONIANS!!! Accept that.--Raso mk (talk) 08:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope they keep them coming. The agenda becomes even more obvious.-- Avg 01:27, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : Finally!!! someone made an Agean Macedonian article! Why should it be deleted? If it gets deleted, then the Jewish Holocaust article should get deleted because Iran doesnt recognize it, and the Armenian Genocide article should be deleted because because Turkey says it doesn't exist, both in the same way Greece says there is no Macedonian minority or exile. They all exist. Fatmanonthehorse (talk) 01:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - it is just a regional term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cukiger (talk • contribs) 11:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This is not the only instance. We're in the middle of an organised POV pushing exercise a la CAMERA. See the number of new POV articles created plus polls such as in Template_talk:Ethnic Macedonians, where socks appeared and off-wiki canvassing has taken place.-- Avg 18:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly a by-product of what I call "Slavomacedonian Veto Syndrome"? --Tsourkpk (talk) 19:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to have fun have a look at the abuse I get at my talk page. They have gone crazy...-- Avg 19:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Holy crap. Time for some Arbcom fun, methinks. --Tsourkpk (talk) 19:25, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The article seems just fine, no POV-pushing, no FORKING, no irridentist claims... It appears that Greek users vote against the article just because they don't like it, but that's no reason to delete it, not even merge it. Slavophone Greeks gives just a brief overview of the Slavic speaking population of Aegean Macedonia, but this article is about the portion of that population that consider themselves part of another nation, particularly in this case, the Macedonian nation. Greeks have a problem with that, but Wikipedia doesn't. --iNkubusse^? 12:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete POV-fork Giourkas (talk) 19:56, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a POV fork. --157.228.x.x (talk) 18:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - --Тиверополник (talk) 21:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

note Another new user whose only contrib is the vote he casted here. Clear another case of off-wiki canvassing. --Laveol ^T 21:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

note - I see User:Giourkas is a trusted member of the community. I think we all know these votes were not cast on rational grounds, except for the ones by non-Greek/Bulgarian and non-Macedonian users. --iNkubusse^? 22:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, you admit to casting your vote on "irrational grounds"? 3rdAlcove (talk) 01:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's slander, shame on you. I'm saying that Greeks vote Delete just because they don't like it (because of reasons that I wouldn't dare mention), and to make balance, I mentioned Macedonian users as well. My point is that we cannot solve this by just voting, because it is more than clear that Greeks vote delete and Macedonians keep, no matter their reason. Before you accuse any "party" for canvassing, have in mind that both parties are canvassing, obviously! And I have given my reasons above, I think they're pretty rational. The article is not violating anything. --iNkubusse^? 01:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As far as i am aware 2 non Macedonian users have voted keep, while no non bulgarian-greek users have voted delete. P m kocovski (talk) 06:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, and at least one non-Balkan editor voted delete. The delete votes have a pretty good reasoning at least. I mean, what kind of a reason is why delete?--Laveol ^T 06:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who was that (the non balkan user)? P m kocovski (talk) 07:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Calling it a POV-fork when it isn't is not good reasoning, as explained by one non-Balkan editor already. Balkan Fever 09:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tried my best so far to avoid any involvement in Macedonian related issues but I can't resist commenting on this Balkan versus non Balkan users. It is high time this uninvolved balkan users mumbling seized for good. I find it higly improbable that a trully "uninvolved" non Balkan user would ever give a rat's ass for Macedonia (Greek or Macedonian or "Aegean" or whatever). This whole Macedonia or Fyrom /Greece/Bulgaria situation is so so so frustrating... so much energy spent for nothing. You may think I am naive but why do I get the feeling that the things we actually have in common (all of us) are infinately more numerous than our differences? Could somebody pause a minute and reflect on this for a change?--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 18:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete Very controversial. POV fork unnecessary. Meander^₪ 10:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Could possibly be renamed to Ethnic Macedonians in Greece with an explanation as to who uses "Aegean Macedonians". Well documented and very common topic in the media (internationally and locally). The "POV fork" claims are not justified. If we have Slavophone Greeks, we need this article. Things are split 50/50 at the moment. --Hegumen (talk) 10:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

note - "Aegean Macedonians" doesn't mean "Ethnic Macedonians in Greece"; it's the name for all Macedonians originating from Aegean Macedonia. Many of them live in EU countries, RoM and overseas countries. See Marek Jankulovski as an example. --iNkubusse^? 17:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (or possibly merge) per Fut.Perf. If kept may require renaming.--Staberinde (talk) 13:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nominator and Laveol.--Yannismarou (talk) 16:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or merge. The article reads biased but almost certainly unintentionally so. It has been written with much enthusiasm but saddly limited knowledge to the facts; this gives the article too many (legitimate) mistakes, partisan sources and misplaced emphasis. In order to rectify so many mistakes, we would probably need to spend many tiresome weeks and, in the heat of it, the current trend for invectives will intensify: Wikipedia is not intended for correcting articles as if they were a thesis for an MA degree. Of course, since the 1940s, there are people who identify as Egeski Makedonski; but the subject is far too unexplored, therefore most contributors cannot help being POV. It has been covered through other articles. That is why I say patience dear friends. If any offence has been caused by these comments, please notify me on my talk page. Politis (talk) 17:57, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.