User talk:Jingiby/Archive 24

Archive 20

←

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

"Pro-Soviet" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Pro-Soviet. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 20#Pro-Soviet until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. TheAwesomeHwyh 16:10, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Use of Bulgarian on the Pustec Municipality listing of languages.

Hello. You reverted my change regarding my edit of only adding Macedonian as one of the languages on the top list on the page on Pustec Municipality. My change made sense since as I explained in the summary of my edit, Albanian and Macedonian are the only recognised official languages in that municipality, and the Macedonians are the majority within it. casting aside politics and historical arguing, regardless of someone's stance on the Macedonian people and language, they are internationally recognised and so is the language, and the majority of the people living in the area identify as Macedonian, not Bulgarian. The Neutral Point of View as such would be that Albanian and Macedonian are the only official languages in that municipality. It would be best if you reverted your change as it makes most sense to the modern reader of Wikipedia. Thank you. -Kristiano100

Hi, the Bulgarian language and Bulgarian minority were officially recognized by the Albanian government in October 2017. Do not delete them from articles related to Albania. Read also the article Albanian-Bulgarian Protocol (1932), to see when they were recognized firstly. Jingiby (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Mirce Acev

Can you explain what is the problem with the article about Mirce Acev? Which part is not neutral for you? Feel free to edit the 'non-neutral' parts if there are any. Thanks --Forbidden History (talk) 18:18, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

On article's talk-page, please. Jingiby (talk) 19:20, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jordan Nikolov Orce, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ilinden.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:20, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

If you want to comment

Hi Jingiby, if you want to comment on this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Dikaiosyni_reported_by_User:StoyanStoyanov80_(Result:_) — Preceding unsigned comment added by StoyanStoyanov80 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Partisans

How is it "not an improvement"? It's a random piece of information, which include information about Serbia while the editors have added info. about Serbs. Not okay. I might pay more attention to Macedonia-related articles, I guess. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 12:29, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

The info is about important fact: mass mobilization of Serbians, Macedonians and Kosovo Albanians, i.e. it encompasses 3 modern countries, not per your comment about one state. Regards.Jingiby (talk) 12:32, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Possible edit wars betwen Macedonians and Bulgarians

FYI: WP:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 159#Possible edit wars between Bulgarians and Macedonians (dated 2 June 2020). The only article mentioned in that report is Yordan Piperkata. I have noticed a few cases where people change 'Bulgarian' to 'Macedonian' and vice versa. From a few years ago I remember a dispute at Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization. Since 2016 that page has been under indefinite semiprotection. If you know any other pages that admins should be watching, let me know. EdJohnston (talk) 01:06, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi, would you like to read the article Macedonian historiography?Jingiby (talk) 04:53, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

What would the grounds for semiprotection be? EdJohnston (talk) 05:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

It's not just for information. My idea was to orient yourself in the situation. Jingiby (talk) 09:18, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Ed, now, in essence, if the administrators have to lock a topic for registered editors, it is Samuel of Bulgaria, as well as the Ilinden Uprising. Otherwise, all articles from the categories: Category:Macedonian Bulgarians, Category:Members of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization, and Category:Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization might be observed. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 12:41, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Missing khans

There appear to be no articles for the two Bulgarian khans that immediately followed Khan Krum and ruled for a month or so in total. They may have been Krum's brothers. I thought you might be interested in this lacuna. GPinkerton (talk) 15:33, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

I think they were Omurtag and Malamir. Wouldn't they? Jingiby (talk) 16:53, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

No, before there was Omurtag there were two others mentioned at: Omurtag_of_Bulgaria#Rise_to_the_throne. One of them is said to have ordered the death of some Roman soldiers noted in the Synaxarion of Constantinople, the Martyrs of Adrianople. GPinkerton (talk) 17:11, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Hm, that is interesting, but I am not expert of that issue. What I have realized is that there had been riots and several military leaders had briefly lined up on the throne. Jingiby (talk) 17:33, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Several Accounts

Hi dear, i do not use an double account, this is my one and only account on Wikipedia. Ive been pretty new tho. It could be that my siblings made an account before. What was the name of it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnWikiuser60 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi AnWikiuser60, your first edit after registration, strangely resembles the edits of a set of IPs, which single purpose was to disrupt the article through deletion of sourced content, and especially these describing the upper number of the Ottoman troops. Jingiby (talk) 19:24, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes as i said it could be my sibling, under which name was it done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnWikiuser60 (talk • contribs) 23:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Bitolska-ploca.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Bitolska-ploca.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dylsss^{(talk contribs)} 18:41, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Ivica

Why did you spam on my page and accuse me of being someone I'm not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartiniMKD (talk • contribs) 14:49, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

However I think you are not a new one here. Jingiby (talk) 15:14, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

Your recent editing history at Kiro Gligorov shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

I'm leaving you the same warning as the IP was left in order to be fair. Try and work things out with the IP user if you can. I'm here if you need any help. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:34, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Drama Uprising

Stop, presenting a source that never done any census and easily to declare the Macedonian minority in Greece as Bulgarian one. Source were provided to you (3 from Helsinki committee and Human Right Watch and now even a book). I will report you for constant vandalism and POV pushing about this issue. Thank you --Forbidden History (talk) 17:15, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand which source it is. Jingiby (talk) 19:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The editor in question failed to notify those involved, so here I am. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Edits Ho Cap'n! but I can not find it. Jingiby (talk) 18:57, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Oops, my bad, its actually at AN, used the wrong template [1] CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 19:02, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour and DYK

Hi Jingiby, I find Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour quite interesting and think it would be an interesting WP:DYK entry. Would you mind if I nominated it, suggesting the hook "that the Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour, created during WWII to quash opposition to Macedonian nationalism, remained in force until 1991", or similar (perhaps "quash support of Bulgarian self-identification")? Best, CMD (talk) 10:20, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi CMD, no problems with this nomination, I think. However it was in force till 1991, but it played its crucial role especially in 1945-1949. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 10:25, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Well hopefully intrepid readers will click through to learn that! CMD (talk) 11:13, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

• It looks like the DYK nomination set off someone with a bit of a POV. I think if you just add reference list quotes in for the other references like you already did for some of them in the reference list, that would be reason enough to remove the tags that are being added. Silverseren^C 22:52, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Bloody Christmas (1945)

The IP has posted on the article talk page, you should engage there. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:32, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

OK. Jingiby (talk) 19:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Marry Christmas and Happy New Year

	Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
	Hello everybody, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, to every Wikipedian, who celebrates these holidays! Jingiby (talk) 09:54, 24 December 2020 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Serbs

I suggest you ask for page protection, its getting daft. Also an SPI maybe in order.Slatersteven (talk) 11:24, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Slatersteven, I reported the case on the page Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, too. Jingiby (talk) 11:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour

Hello! Your submission of Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:18, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

List of ancient Greek tribes

In the content that I added to the List of ancient Greek tribes I was careful to point out it was a possible kinship or relation in the section title itself "Possible Hellenic related peoples", it was not a statement of certainty, I was also careful to present different views from several scholars and used Conditional mood to express there are no certainties about this issue. Even if it is a minority point of view it is not baseless, majority and minority points of view should be presented but pointing out what is what and why. I have no problem with discussing this issue or making improvements. Happy New Year!Bird Vision (talk) 14:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation Bird Vision. Happy New Year! Jingiby (talk) 14:24, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour

On 7 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour, created during World War II to quash opposition to Macedonian nationalism, remained in force until 1991? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

— Maile , thank you for informing me. Jingiby (talk) 12:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Pande Eftimov moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Pande Eftimov, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:10, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Is it okay?

Hey, Jingiby, I think it's about time that this whole situation with the Law for the Protection of Macedonian National Honour‎ article gets taken to the incident noticeboard. Are you okay with me doing so myself? Silverseren^C 22:37, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok Silverseren, do it, then. Jingiby (talk) 05:32, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

ANI Notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Silverseren^C 06:13, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pande Eftimov has been accepted

Pande Eftimov, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:04, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Onel5969. Jingiby (talk) 04:19, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

An article you may be interested in

Zdravei Jingiby,

I found an article that you may be interested in improving as you know seem to know a lot about the history of Bulgaria.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Bulgarian_history

--SeriousCherno (talk) 14:17, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 14:39, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Jingiby - people are trying to talk and ask for corrections to be made - but they are not being considered when there are obvious misleading information about Bulgar origin and this leads to spreading old and wrong theses. I suggested debate about the article - no one replied. Plus my changes made as well sources used. Bulgars article is full of misleading info.

Jingiby talk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanya Ilcheva (talk • contribs) 10:24, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Vanya Ilcheva the autochthonous theory about the origin of the Bulgarians is a fringe theory unsupported today by none from the serious researchers. Jingiby (talk) 10:44, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

jingibi, you are not right - you are supporting theories from the 20th century, proved wrong by modern scholars, which is wrongdoing for articles in wiki. -  Bulgars have nothing to do with the mongols or turkic people. We are the autochthonous population of the Balkans and the area near Azov sea and Volga river area. A comparative genetic study shows the Bulgarians primarily represented by the Western Eurasian Y haplogroups, with 40% belonging to haplogroups E-V13 and I-M423, and 20% to R-M17 (R-M198 and R-M458). Haplogroups common in the Middle East (J-M172, J-M267, and G-M201) and in South Western Asia (R-L23*) occur at frequencies of 19% and 5%, respectively. Haplogroups C, N and Q together occur at the negligible frequency of only 1.5% among Bulgarians. So don't make us Turkic (take even their features) when we are Bulgarians with Indo-European features

И не мога да разбера като българин как може да подкрепяш такива глупости.

Vanya Ilcheva — Preceding undated comment added 10:52, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Jingiby - did you report my comment above as a offensive?

Maketo, you have google translate even though you speak and understand Bulgarian very well and you know this is not an offense. 

Second - the theory you are folioing as per the Turkic theory means that all nowadays Macedonians are turkic as well, think about it - especially when you take your DNA test and shows that you have Bulgarian origin.

Third - the theory you are wrongly following and keep correcting me its proven wrong by Bulgarian scholars and recent DNA test of the population -1) http://www.bgnow.eu/news.php?cat=3&cp=0&newsid=14582

this article is showing where the proven wrong of the Turkic origin comes from:

2) http://www.bulgari-istoria-2010.com/booksBG/I_Vojnikov_Tjurkskata_teorija.pdf

So next time when you go and correct someone - go and do your study and you make fool of yourself, especially when you ask someone to be blocked and the dispute stops

But I understand why you are agains Bulgaria and real Bulgarian origin - as this was coded in your brains after 1945 and your fierce hatred is shown by the thing you have written in your channel, I will quote you:

"Посветено за сите непријатели на Македонија Нема добри луѓе само предавник и кодош Другари се од корист, ниту еден од помош Па она вообичаено за оној кој нема И оној наситениот кој се повеќе зема Кругот на пријатели се повеќе e тесен Добро размисли дали вреди денес да си чесен Убиство на претседател ни траг ни глас Што ке се случи ако бидам убиен јас? Нова влада песна стара, каде спасот да се бара? Само криминал и се пере тешка пара Политичарите не ги ставам во живите 1 милион eмигранти во Италија на нивите И како спијат мирно, дали совест не ги гриза? И дали има излез од оваа криза? Репрезентот што владее на оваа територија На душава моја тетовирав Македонија!

Ќе дојде денот кога се од рака ќе ни појде Нека знае душманот што е наше ќе си дојде Пирин и Егеј ќе бидат наши како некогаш Постоиме од секогаш и засекогаш

Ќе дојде денот кога се од рака ќе ни појде Нека знае душманот што е наше ќе си дојде Пирин и Егеј ќе бидат наши како некогаш Постоиме секогаш Македонија засекогаш!!!"

Sounds like mumbling in a dream, that happens to be so real. I will suggest you go and ready something different then your "macedonian source" or pro-Russian ideology ones and then edit articles.

Vanya Ilcheva Jingiby — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanya Ilcheva (talk • contribs) 12:20, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Helpful site

Search for books on this site.[2] --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:09, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 03:51, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Voydan Popgeorgiev – Chernodrinski, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macedonia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Tetova

Hey Jingiby! So we were talking about whether the term "ethnic Macedonians" should be used in Tetova or not. So my point is that Tetova has always been part of the ethnic Albanian region - therefore inhabited mostly by ethnic Albanians. Therefore i think that it's not logical to say that there are ethnic Macedonians in Tetova, because most of them came after 1945. Let alone the term "Macedonians" who is also very disputable. Macedonians are a very young (made up) "nation", the region of todays Macedonia was inhabited by Albanians and Bulgars - and the "Macedonians" of today are Bulgars. The fact that they make one third of the population is a result of this "new Macedonian nation" - politics, if you have ever been in those areas, you know the percentage is highly faked. Henceforth I think that the term "ethnic Macedonians" shouldn't be used, because there is nothing ethnic about them. With all respect, Bardhyll — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bardhyll (talk • contribs) 09:40, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	We may not always agree (and we don't have to) but our cooperation has always been solid. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 18:47, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much Sadkσ. I'm really moved! Jingiby (talk) 03:47, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Quick Question

Hi man, just wondering what to do in this case, this handball player has played for Macedonia until 2013 but now the team is called North Macedonia. Is it correct to update the name or to leave it as it is?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stev%C4%8De_Alu%C5%A1evski

--MacedonianGuy97 (talk) 21:23, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

HI, I think it is better to leave it for now. Jingiby (talk) 03:39, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok cheers for the heads up --MacedonianGuy97 (talk) 09:45, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonian_Voice_(1913%E2%80%931914) this article may be of your interest. --MacedonianGuy97 (talk) 11:52, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Mislabeling significant edits as minor

Removing the Bulgarian name of Eastern Rumelia as you did here is not a minor tweak and considering that Bulgarian was the predominant and official language in Eastern Rumelia, it is strongly against NPOV as well. Such edits should be at the very least explained (preferably on the talk page) rather than falsely disguised as minor ones. Kostja (talk) 08:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

It was my mistake. Jingiby (talk) 09:19, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Resilient Barnstar
	Congratulations to you on spreading Bulgarian propaganda about Serbian Macedonia. It is nice to know the articles about our kings are edited by literal VMRO supporters and people who think Macedonia is Bulgarian. We will be sure not to forget this. Serbon24 (talk) 19:03, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Very polite. Jingiby (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Jingiby have been reported as false stating

Page: Bulgars (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Jingiby (talk · contribs · logs · edit filter log · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [45]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

[46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [52]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on my talk page: [53]

(talk) (Vanya Ilcheva) — Preceding undated comment added 12:30, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Macedoniatimes.news may not be a good source

Zdrasti,

I saw that you used Macedoniatimes.news as a source on the North Macedonia page but I don't think it is that great of a source:

http://bulgariabusinessinsider.com/macedonia-times-united-macedonia-diasporas-media-proxy/

I will let you to decide, it may be biased in certain pages such as history and UMD.

--MacedonianGuy97 (talk) 14:59, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Opposite Opinion

Please if you want to take a look at this section that I made https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasil_Garvanliev#Controversy . I tried to be as neutral as I could, but just to make sure I want the other side to take a look.

--MacedonianGuy97 (talk) 17:28, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Please do not do this

On your edits on Ottoman Caliphate and 31 March Incident you did not give a reason why you removed the added details about Cypriot-Islamists (Anti-Islamist). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.79.162.223 (talk) 17:12, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

April 2021

I think your editing on pazardzhik is causing misunderstanding and confusion. Turkish-speaking roma should be included in the roma category like Bulgarian-speaking roma. Putting Muslim roma as the explanation of the Turkish people means completely ignoring people who are ethnically Turks. Please let's make these distinctions well so as not to cause confusion. Thank you. Estella0011 (talk) 20:43, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

your edits cause confusion

I think your editing on Pazardzhik is causing misunderstanding and confusion. Turkish-speaking roma should be included in the roma category like Bulgarian-speaking roma. Putting Muslim roma as the explanation of the Turkish people means completely ignoring people who are ethnically Turks. Please let's make these distinctions well so as not to cause confusion. Thank you. Estella0011 (talk) 20:50, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, please respect the sources provided on article's talk page. They clearly explain the Turish Gypsies in Pazardzhik are not a Turks but were counted as such on the last census. Your personal opinion is not so important there. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 03:59, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

sources don't verify your edit

Sources don't verify your edit on [ [ Pazardzhik] ]. I see that some groups in Romani neighborhoods see themselves as Turks. The groups mentioned in the sources do not include people who do not reside in gypsy quarters and are ethnically Turkish. The information in the sources does not exactly match the editing you made. My goal is not to dictate my personal opinions, I just think that obvious confusion should be avoided. Thanks. Estella0011 (talk) 12:56, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, there is no reliable source confirming the presence of native Turks in Pazardzhik in the last 50 years. There is only significant Romany community with different, often fluctuating self-identity, including Turkish one. May you provide some scientific researches confirming your claims? Jingiby (talk) 13:07, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Early Slavs

This is rather obnoxious, you deleted an image which clearly says "BOLGAR and SCLAVIGI", the only thing you are correct on is that there was no date written in the image description, then you proceeded submit the image for deletion despite the fact that it is a sketch of the original tile [3]. --E-960 (talk) 14:58, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

• You need to drop this deletion request, the exact sketch you want to delete can be founds in a reliable reference source, here: [4]! --E-960 (talk) 15:34, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok. This is another story. Jingiby (talk) 15:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

"However the presence of Bulgars and Slavs on it is dubious", I'm not sure where you are getting this from, so the tile has an inscription saying "BOLGAR" and "SCLAVIGI" yet you are writing in the image caption that the depiction on the tile of Bulgars and Slavs is dubious? Seriously... the source presents this as a whole tile, yet you are inserting POV and alleging that these are separated tiles (a unfounded claim which is going against the sources provided). --E-960 (talk) 16:42, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

E-960 have you read the text I pointed: As most notable, in front of the ``Bulgar`s`` horse from the left side of the photo of the composition, a tale of another horse is clearly visible (not showed on the drawing), which means that the composition continued with another horseman on the right, and therefore, the side with the ``bulgars`` and the side with the ``sclavenes`` could not be parts of a same relief. Not even the bow of the lower, ``sclavene`` archer is visible as well. The name ``SCLAVIGI`` is also very problematic, since, according to the photo, only the first letters (SC) could be read for sure. The inscription SC is actually a part of SCS (short for SANCTUS), an inscription attested on most of the other representations of the saints from the terracotas. That’s why, we believe that the right, ``sclavenes`` part is an Old Testament battle, and has nothing in common with the Slavs. The left, ``Bulgar`` part is also problematic for being recognized as the oldest representation of the Bulgarians. First of all, the inscription starts with the cross, and even if we know that the cross is pointing the beginning of the inscriptions, it`s religious role, as invocation of God, could not be excluded, and there is no logic for being stamped in front of the name of the Bulgar`s marauders. The representation of the ``Bulgarian khan Kuber`` is not even by chance typical just for Bulgarians – his sword, recognized as ``Bulgarian sword – handzar`` has much more in common with the late antique gladius or spata swords (fig. 14), than with the preserved early medieval swords attested on Bulgarian territory. The name Bolgar (and the inscription probably continued on the other, destroyed side) is also untypical for the oldest preserved sources about Bulgarians – they are always called B/Vulgares by the Latins, or Βουλγάρων by the Byzantines, but never as Bolgar. Therefore, there is a big lack of arguments to identify those horsemen as Bulgarians. Jingiby (talk) 16:52, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I see, I've added a note in the image caption, which implies this is not a universal view. The drawing is according to Balabanov, however Gjorgjievski thinks this is not correct. This would not be the first time scholars disagree. However, Balabanov is a reliable source, so you simply can't dismiss it or say it's wrong. --E-960 (talk) 17:09, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

E-960, I'm not sure which one is right, but this tile is quite mysterious. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 17:23, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved, see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#About_user_Jingiby. Thank you. Jerm (talk) 18:17, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 18:21, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Edits

Hello, on the edit I made, how is it not an improvement when Arabic and Turkish music are all part of middle eastern music? Ashjk89 (talk) 20:30, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ashjk89, because Middle Eastern music is broader term and encompasses not only not Arabic and Turkish music. Jingiby (talk) 04:40, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hello, why did I get my edit removed? There was no source supporting the first statement and there are no reliable sources supporting the rest of the statements, one of the references talks about Belgrade which is a city in Serbia and has nothing to do with what is being said. You are letting false information with no reliable sources to back it up, sit on this website & it is not okay. I’m not trying to be “disruptive” or anything I just don’t want people reading inaccurate information, why can’t it be removed until better & true info is provided? Gfevv777 (talk) 05:53, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 06:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes I agree, I was just trying to help because (I assume your Bulgarian) I am as well and i wasn’t trying to be disruptive like you said, I want to protect Bulgaria’s history, food, and etc because I’ve noticed a lot of false information and I don’t want people reading inaccurate info about Bulgaria. Bulgaria doesn’t have any traditional food with influence from Austro-Hungarian Empire, of France, of Italy. And for the Ayran, Gyuvech, moussaka they do not come from Ottoman cuisine and there was no actual source supporting it in there. Moussaka actually originated in the Middle East and spread throughout many countries due to ottoman. It’s said that there has been Ayran in Bulgaria before Ottoman Empire, and Gyuvech is pure Bulgarian food with a most likely a Thracian origin, the Gyuvech may derive from a Turkish word but keep in mind that due to the Ottoman Empire, names got exchanged and borrowed but the food remains the same. I asked a Turk if he knows what Gyuvech is and he said he has no idea and he even searched it up, he said it’s not really Turkish food, they might have it in the European part of Turkey which is Thrace, and it most likely came from Thracians. And it makes sense since Gyuvech gets its name from the pot it’s cooked in (they both share the same name & Turks changed the name because of Ottoman) but Gyuvech has always been originally called the Thracian Clay pot. Therefore I’m sorry if it seemed like I was trying to disrupt anything, but I don’t want the history nor food of my country erased of its true origin and claimed by other nations, I hope you understand. Gfevv777 (talk) 06:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia works based on sources, not on personal opinions. Jingiby (talk) 06:38, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

And for moussaka if you look into the original moussaka from the Middle East, and the Bulgarian musaka they look nothing a like and have all most nothing in common. But I can guarantee that those foods do not come from Ottoman Turks. Turkish food and music is made up of Balkan and Middle Eastern food and music, not to mention that Turks lost almost all their Turkic culture & got influence from Balkans and Middle East & borrowed many foods from the countries they conquered & changed the names of those foods. Therefore I believe that history should be removed till better and actual information is found :) Gfevv777 (talk) 06:42, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes I understand that but the statement I removed seemed to be based off of personal opinions as well. There was no reliable source supporting it therefore how do we know it’s true Gfevv777 (talk) 06:44, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

And mine is not really an opinion, others had been noticing this too. Gfevv777 (talk) 06:45, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Also it’s pretty obvious that Austro-Hungarian Empire, France, Italy, have no influence on Bulgarian food. I suggest removing history till better information is found but if you don’t agree then I can’t really do anything about it, hopefully you think it through.... :) Gfevv777 (talk) 06:49, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Do not disrupt this article. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 06:50, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I am not disrupting? I thought we were supposed to talk in out in the talk page Gfevv777 (talk) 06:58, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

The statement that is under history is based off of someones opinion with no reliable sources to support it especially the “Austro-Hungarian Empire, France, Italy” part but okay... Gfevv777 (talk) 07:00, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Jingiby, thank you for your instructions and efforts to make Wikipedia a better place. I am new here and from now on will use sources/commentaries when editing some article. Have a great day! - ButtersIO

Hi, User:ButtersIO. The Albanian language is used as co-official along with Macedonian in the municipalities where speakers of Albanian consists at least 20% of the population or more. Jingiby (talk) 12:57, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for that information Jingiby but there is no source linked on page nor new census to confirm that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ButtersIO (talk • contribs) 13:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Jigsby again thank you for your great interest for making Wikipedia a better place. I added my source and I also live near Petrovec, it shouldn't be allowed for people with foreign IP to edit pages that they are not competent in, like 'Alltan'. Please scan his history; he doesn't use sources and promotes nationalism, homophobia and radicalism.

Source required

Hi Jingiby, can you cite a source for your removal of the content which I reinstated? The linked pages you removed provide explicit sources as to the Macedonian identity of the individuals in question. If you feel these articles are inaccurate you should start there rather than the Hajduk page (which you'll notice does not provide any sources in the edited section as it is a simple list of individuals). As you mentioned on my talk page, you might look at the tutorial on citing sources. The confusing "Macedonian identity arose later" edit summary is in my opinion insufficient. Is it your intention to remove all listed individuals under the "Notable hajduks" section due to lack of inline citations? 101.184.165.40 (talk) 03:14, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

No source was provided for this change. These people were neither Hajduks, nor Macedonians. Macedonian identity arose after WWI, while Macedonia as a country was formed after WWII. Jingiby (talk) 03:18, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Neither was a source provided for your change. Do the same rules apply to both us editors? Also, please let's stick to the mechanics here and dispense with the dubious history lessons. 101.184.165.40 (talk) 03:32, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

No, see: Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Jingiby (talk) 03:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Indeed, I welcome additional input. I am confused at your stance regarding your intial revert. Why did you remove the subsection Macedonian from the article but no others? Why was a source not required by you at that time, but is required by me now? What does "No" refer to here? 101.184.165.40 (talk) 03:39, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

In the early 19th century, the name of Macedonia was almost unknown in the modern-day area. It was revived only in middle of the century, with the rise of nationalism in the Ottoman Empire. In this way Karposh could be not Macedonian Hajduk as he was active earlier. In the early 20th century the region was already a national cause, contested among Bulgarian, Greek and Serbian nationalists. However Delchev and Gruev were Bulgarian teachers not not hajduks. During the interwar period in Vardar Macedonia, part of the young locals repressed by the Serbs attempted at a separate way of ethnic development. In 1934 the Comintern issued a resolution about the recognition of a separate Macedonian ethnicity. However, the existence of considerable Macedonian national consciousness prior to the 1940s is disputed. Also Bulgarian teachers who died in the early 20th century could not be ethnic Macedonian hajduks. Jingiby (talk) 03:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

As mentioned Jingiby, having done much research into this area myself I am not terribly interested in the history lessons. Rather I would specifically like these edit-specific questions answered: Why did you remove the subsection Macedonian from the article but no others? Why was a source not required by you at that time, but is required by me now? 101.184.165.40 (talk) 03:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Additionally, these concerns of yours need be addressed on the articles concerning the individuals in question (which include explicitly sourced info in opposition to your position). The Hajduk article is not the appropriate place for this particular disagreement. 101.184.165.40 (talk) 03:53, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep in mind that the three people you mentioned were active in Ottoman Macedonia, but also in Ottoman Thrace. Karposh was active also in Moesia. Delchev and Gruev are active in the Principality of Bulgaria too and there is no source for them that they were hajduks.

Hmm. Are you unwilling to answer these specific questions or address my editing-specific concerns? I asked that we stick to mechanics of Wikipedia rather than sabre-rattling re disputed history. That does not seem to be possible here. Should we take this to dispute resolution? I am happy to put pause on this until you have such time to do so. 101.184.165.40 (talk) 04:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

No problems. By the way, I agree that Karposh should be mentioned as a haidouk in the Ottoman Balkans, as stated in his article. For the other two, I am categorically against being qualified as hajduks, hence they were komitajis, even more so only in Macedonia. Jingiby (talk) 04:14, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I will begin the process as my time allows. I will leave the page as is for now as it appears that reverting your initial unsourced edit will result in nothing but an edit war. Additionally I think such reasoning as you described above should have been included in the initial revert, as it was not minor. I believe that avoiding such elision would go a long way to preventing such confusion in the future. 101.184.165.40 (talk) 04:23, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Final clarification for Delchev and Gruev. Both are members of the leadership of two revolutionary organizations. These are people with higher education and their activity is carried out from an European capital. This is difficult to connect with the hajduks-activity, which is on the principle of voluntary local detachments, acting sporadically and is far from organized revolutionary undertaking. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 04:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Municipality and town of Delchevo

Listen here Jingiby, if you have any complexes and nationalism issues you wanna solve, take them somewhere else. You aren't from Delchevo, you have probably never been to Delchevo and your dad definitely doesn't work in the city archives. I surely know better than you what nationality my fellow people are. Your information is misleading and false. I have lived my whole life in Delchevo and have never heard anyone call themselves, or their ancestors, a Bulgarian.

Hi, you may be in conflict of interests. Jingiby (talk) 20:13, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Your email

Hello Jingiby. The concerns you have raised about another editor ought to be posted in public on my talk page. So there is nothing that requires any privacy. Some options may be available to handle the dispute. Thanks EdJohnston (talk) 19:25, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks EdJohnston. Jingiby (talk) 02:53, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Nationalistic and dogmatic editing sprees on Macedonian history on Wikipedia

Hello there Jingiby,

Over the past few weeks, I have been looking around your edits, especially on topics of Macedonian history or culture. Now I support looking at history without bias, however a lot of your edits seem to be minimizing Macedonian historical and cultural figures. Now this may be out of negligence which is fine as it's not intentional, however if this is because of bias and feeling a patriotic duty to your country, this is not okay on Wikipedia. I'll be honest that in earlier days, I made some disruptive edits which I've stopped. You on the other hand seem to be trying to whitewash all of Wikipedia to remove pre-socialist Yugoslavian Macedonian representation and at that, you're honestly succeeding as a result of your vast amounts of edits. I have no problem describing major Balkan historical figures as both Macedonian and Bulgarian as both our countries have claims to these people. I'm guessing you won't accept that solution and will only accept a solution which puts Bulgarian historiography on top.

Have a good day now and please change your editing behavior. --Okrados (talk) 17:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, for all my edits I use reliable sources. Jingiby (talk) 17:55, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, clearly you haven't as I've seen you use clearly biased Bulgarian sources many times. Many times, your edits seem to be not backed up by any sources but instead by Bulgarian nationalist chauvinism and fervor. --Okrados (talk) 20:15, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your biased comments and edits.You have deleted the following sources: The Macedonian conflict: ethnic nationalism in a transnational world|, Loring M. Danforth, Princeton University Press, 1997, ISBN 0691043566, Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia, Historical Dictionaries of Europe, Dimitar Bechev, Scarecrow Press, 2009, ISBN 0810862956, Entangled Histories of the Balkans:, Roumen Daskalov, Tchavdar Marinov, BRILL, 2013, ISBN 900425076X, Encyclopædia Britannica online, the article on Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO), etc. Jingiby (talk) 02:42, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

May I see these exact pages where I deleted this? --Okrados (talk) 19:27, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

here Jingiby (talk) 02:58, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Going by that source's logic, we should change any historically Macedonian figures to being called Slavic Macedonians instead of Bulgaro-Macedonians as I quote, "The IMARO activists saw the future autonomous Macedonia as a multinational polity, and did not pursue the self-determination of Macedonian Slavs as a separate ethnicity. Therefore, Macedonian was an umbrella term covering Bulgarians, Turks, Greeks, Vlachs, Albanians, Serbs, Jews, and so on." Additionally, there has been proof of a coherent Slavic Macedonian identity going back at least to the 1860s. Here's a quote from Georgi Pulevski, "What do we call a nation? – People who are of the same origin and who speak the same words and who live and make friends of each other, who have the same customs and songs and entertainment are what we call a nation, and the place where that people lives is called the people's country. Thus the Macedonians also are a nation and the place which is theirs is called Macedonia." By that definition, it is inherently wrong to be describing Ilinden era Macedonians as Bulgarians because even if they did not personally ascribe the label of Macedonian in the modern sense to themselves, they were still part of a coherent nation distinct from the Bulgarians. If a Walloonian Belgian decides to call himself a Frenchman, he is still a Walloon regardless of whatever self-description he gives himself. Same goes with Macedonians. --Okrados (talk) 16:06, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I put a few warnings on your talk page. Please stop your destructive edits. Jingiby (talk) 17:53, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I apologize for any edits which can be construed as destructive but please respond to my point here. Unless you have nothing to respond with.... In that case, I suggest stop trying to run through Balkan Wikipedia whitewashing everything in a pro-Bulgarian POV. Thank you and have a good day ---- Okrados (talk) 06:17, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I have informed officially an admin EdJohnston on the issue on his talk page. Jingiby (talk) 08:27, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Why

You made a revert here. But did not leave an edit summary. And the revert seems to lack basis. What did you have in mind? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sofia&diff=1067394416&oldid=1067392026 --2603:7000:2143:8500:30CD:F863:CA5C:68FC (talk) 10:33, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, it was my mistake. I tried to push him to the Sport section, but I have realized it was better here. I revert myself. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 14:59, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Enjoy your Sunday. --2603:7000:2143:8500:30CD:F863:CA5C:68FC (talk) 19:15, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

DS Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Balkans or Eastern Europe. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Jingiby, I'm becoming concerned about your seeming determination to argue the details of ethnicity of the creators of foods and insisting on using your own knowledge to force a Bulgarian POV into articles such as Cincinnati chili and Coney Island hot dog and again Coney Island hot dog #2. valereee (talk) 10:37, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Kostur dialect

There is a recording of the Kostur dialect, that I'm having trouble adding to the Kostur dialect page on the English Wikipedia. Could you add it for me" https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kalina_Stena,_Bulgarian_dialectology,_Gabresh,_Kostursko.mp3 Drenowe (talk) 12:32, 2 March 2022 (UTC) Drenowe (talk) 12:33, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I've done it for you. You can use the same template to add recordings in the future. Cheers --Laveol ^T 13:25, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Drenowe (talk) 14:38, 2 March 2022 (UTC)