Wikipedia talk:WikiProject North Macedonia/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Matka

Hi all. Englishman living in Skopje here. Noted your project when looking up some local areas on the map. I could not find the 'Matka' area West of Skopje listed anywhere on wiki. As it is a point of interest and a place where several people go for a local break from the city I thought it would be worth adding to wiki, and adding to knowledge of your country. Are there any objections if I decide to do as such? (Probably just a stub with a picture or two). I realise there are sensitive issues with all items here and do not want to upset anyone in the first instance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quagswag (talk • contribs) 07:50, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Balkans

I suggest creating a WikiProject in which we'll edit balkan-realted articles without bulgarising, hellenising or macedonising them.--Phantom IP 17:44, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Here is something of the sort. --Laveol ^T 21:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Toše Proeski

Ne mi se veruva. Toshe... Toshe go snema, zamina.Pochivaj vo mir Toshe. Rest in peace. :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strich3d (talk • contribs) 14:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC) --strich3D 14:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Rest in peace :( --Laveol ^T 17:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Бог да го прости! Амин! Jingby 17:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Transliteration

I was thinking of renaming the pages about ethnic Macedonians so they use the correct Romanisation of Macedonian. But before performing about 20 moves I wanted to bring it up here so everyone knows what's going on (even though nobody seems active here at wp:mkd :-D). I will move the pages tomorrow - any comments? BalkanFever 02:43, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Just a little mention - I hope this is not about people from the contested group, is it? --Laveol ^T 11:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

No. I'll check the pages before I move them to make sure they aren't. BalkanFever 11:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok - cheers :)--Laveol ^T 12:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Assessment

Before we start adding the template (without assessment) to every page, I was thinking that we should improve the criteria, especially the importance scale. Maybe we could add examples of different article types for each importance level - like biographical, geographical, political, military, music (some of those might overlap :P). Any thoughts? BalkanFever 11:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Symbols for WP MKD

Dear all, Revizionist (talk · contribs) recently changed the front graphic and WP MKD box graphic from the Macedonian flag to the Macedonian Coat of Arms.

I selected the flag initially (rather than the coat of arms) on the basis that it is more readily recognizable as a symbol of Macedonia. The national flag also seems to be the most common symbol used for national WikiProjects, and the flag has been the WP MKD symbol since June 2007, so unless other members also feel the need to change the symbols, I think the flag should remain as the WP symbol.

What do others think -- flag or coat of arms? Cheers, AWN AWN2 (talk) 06:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

IMO, I like the flag better, although we could use the image of the country coloured with the flag for the userbox. For the assessment template I think the coat of arms should stay. BalkanFever 11:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment: I think that's a great idea for the user box!! I agree that the coat of arms should stay for the Assessment template (this seems to be standard practice with other assessment projects). As I said above, I think the flag should stay for the WP main page =) Cheers, AWN2 (talk) 00:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

"Ethnic Macedonian" or "Republic of Macedonia"

I am starting to see an issue for some articles: whether they should be called "Ethnic Macedonian X" or "X of the Republic of Macedonia".

Currently there are two identical articles on Macedonian cuisine: Ethnic Macedonian cuisine and Cuisine of the Republic of Macedonia. The former has been recently created, and should probably be deleted, but should the original be moved?

Two other articles, Ethnic Macedonian music and Ethnic Macedonian literature refer more to the language, but "Macedonian-language music/literature" is a bit tautological.

Another article is Ethnic Macedonian art.

The correct term would be simply "Macedonian X", using the demonym like other articles: French, Italian, Serbian etc. but Macedonian apparently always needs to be disambiguated.

My view is that because "Macedonian" in this context is the demonym for the country, rather than referring to a specific ethnicity, the correct terminology would be "X of the Republic of Macedonia" or "Macedonian X (Republic of Macedonia). It also has the benefits of covering non-ethnic Macedonian contributions to these fields, e.g. Esma Redžepova in music, Artim Šakiri in sport, a Vlach artist in the country etc. What are other editor's views on this? BalkanFever 02:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I think that articles such as these should be titled "X of the Republic of Macedonia" is it does not allow us to include people such such as Esma Redzepova in articles like "Ethnic Macedonian music". If you look at Music of Serbia, the opening sentence is "The Music of the Serbian people and Serbia presents a mixture of the traditional music, which is part of the wider Balkan tradition, with its own distinctive sound." – Though titled simply "Music of Serbia", it acknowledges both the country and its people, allowing for a greater extent of musicians to be included. Köbra^#85 02:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Seeing as nobody objects, I will move the pages. BalkanFever 06:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Latin Europe

Hello WikiProject North Macedonia/Archive 1! There is a vote going on at Latin Europe that might interest you. Please everyone, do come and give your opinion and votes. Thank you. The Ogre (talk) 20:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Template:Ethnic Macedonians

There is a discussion going on about which symbol to use in this template. If anyone is interested your opinion is more than welcome. BalkanFever 09:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:19, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Requesting assessment for Taga za Jug

Hello, I've recently tagged the article Taga za Jug with our project banner. We need to make assessment of the article, but I believe that it is a high importance stub. I also believe that this specific article desperately needs a rewrite that clearly disambiguates that in Bulgaria the song is considered Bulgarian, and that in the Republic of Macedonia the song is considered Macedonian. I've received some complaints from many Macedonian Wikipedia users about the nature of the article; they've reported that there is no mentioning of the Macedonian heritage of the song. I think that it is a good compromise to make: to clarify about the different opinions. Also, it's the right thing to do according to WP:NPV, because in all of the citizens in the Republic of Macedonia consider this song as their own. I also suggest that first we reach a consensus of which edits are going to be made to the page so we can avoid any unnecessary edit wars. Brainmachine (talk) 22:31, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

UPDATE: I see that a lot of other articles desperately need attention. For instance, the article above brought me to the Miladinov Brothers. The category for the article is Bulgarian poets. Now, that can't be good for wikibrowsing! What about the 2.5 million Macedonians who will search the Macedonian Poets category and won't find nothing? This article needs some rewriting. I lol'd, seriously. I also seek assessment for this article, I'm marking it with the WP:MKD banner. Brainmachine (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, the article currently states what world scholars, the brothers themselves and their relatives thought. The view in the Republic of Macedonia is presented as well. Per the current agreement if valid sources for the self-identification are present then this is what the article should say + presenting the other view (which has been done). As for the cats I'm afraid your arguement is not the best (Fut.Perf. already told me the same about tons of issues) cause as he'd say: "We are interested in what an English-speaking person would find in the category. If a Macedonian seeks a poet he'd try the Macedonian wikipedia, right? Why would he search here (unless he only wants to check if his version is presented in English as well)? The view that they were ethnic Macedonians is certianly a fringe one - look at the title of the book where Taga za Yug was published - "Bulgarian folk songs". I'll edit the article about the song accordingly, but it would still say it was written in Bulgarian (which was the case) and that in the Republic of Macedonia it is thought to be one of the most important Macedonian literary work. I really hope the guy from Arachinovo (which most probably was the one complaining) soon stops making lame edits to the articles in qeustion. Cheers. --Laveol ^T 08:20, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, hold on, please don't make any edits before we discuss them. About the cats - picture this: some Macedonian goes to work in Australia and has a family there. (this is true, there are a lot of them). So he has Macedonian-raised children with English as their native language (not Macedonian). So these kids grow up with Macedonian views & they use the English Wikipedia. So, we're doing the cats for them. That is my argument. We're also doing this stuff for them. U know what? Screw that! We're not doing this for Bulgarians or Macedonians to be satisfied that their view is represented, we're doing this in order to inform every English speaker about the reality of the current stands. We're also doing this for the future; think of the long-term benefit: somewhere in the jetson-type-space-age future when WP is really "the sum of all knowledge", we want an article which tells the truth: that in our age, now, the poets, the songs and whatever were considered by our two nations separately as as their own. I'm not arguing what scholars, or what the brothers are saying, I'm not going into that discussion. I'm not even touching this subject even with a ten ft. pole, cause Wikipedia isn't the place for it. I'm just sayin: where the hell is the Macedonian version of Taga za Jug? That ain't right! That is why I kinda think that the Macedonian view isn't represented so well and that is why I'm requesting revision. And we will do this by the book, we'll stay neutral and we'll try to make both sides happy. Is that ok? Btw, whats with the Arachinovo and Fut.Perf. tons of issues stuff, I don't quite get that. Cheers as well, Brainmachine (talk) 12:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I just meant that I already had this conversation a number of times with Fut. Perf. (a number of times). Point is we represent what main-stream scholars say - what you described is some exception. That way - why don't we put the tag "Bulgarian whatever" on every single Macedonian in wiki on the basis that some 70-80% of Bulgarians think they are actually disorientated Bulgarians (I've actually discussed that, too, but with other users). So the point is - they were Bulgarian poets - they thought they were Bulgarians, their kids think they were Bulgarians and scholars East and West think they were Bulgarians - so we have some 6 billion versus 2 million (or less) - I'd call it a fringe view and still it is on the article currently. I don't like words like propaganda and I think they're used too often in our region (God knows why), but I do think that those kids you're speaking about have the right to know. They have the right to know what the native country of their parents thinks something was and what it actually was (As a side issue - more than 100,000 kids of BG emigrants do not self-identify as Bulgarians:( ). I tried to make a similiar arguement about a poet that lived and worked in both Bulgaria and the Republic of Macedonia, but, yet, I was not allowed by two users with no arguments to add his name in Bulgarian (which is actually the same name with BG spelling) and the cat "Bulgarian poets". I'm sorry but the Macedonian view looks "undepresented" cause it is plain ridiculous. I know the Bulgarian view on tons of subjects is in no means less lame (like some issues on the Bulgarians page). I've read both versions of the song and find them identical (except for the spelling cause of the difference in alphabets) so why should there be a version of a fringe view that on top of all is identical to another version? Sorry, but the bottom line is telling the world what the Republic thinks (in the case where the world thinks differently) - I took part in the making of a policy that recognizes both POVs on revolutionaries and the rest, but this is too much. The Arachinovo stuff was about the guy from Arachinovo that makes constant lame edits to a lot of articles and gets constantly reverted. He made a couple of edits on Taga za Yug yesterday and I figured out he was the one complaining. --Laveol ^T 13:38, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Alexandrovo

Is there a place on the rail between Skopje and Kumanovo called Alexandrovo? Of which municipality is it a part? Does it have an article? Has anyone been there? What do they know? Aramgar (talk) 05:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I googled it and all of the results say that it is a village in Bulgaria. On Wikipedia, it says that it an air base in Russia. But their could be a lesser known Alexandrovo somewhere in Macedonia. --The Last King of Brush Park 21:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Sir Arthur Evans and F. W. Hasluck mention the place in connection with an unusual shrine frequented by both Christians and Muslims. The former calls the village Tekke Keui while the latter says that the place had been recently renamed. I have a photocopy of an old Serbian map (unfortunately the publication data are missing) which places the village on the Skopje-Kumanovo rail line at the place where it makes an abrupt turn to the north. I have been unable to find the Alexandrovo on more modern maps. Can someone in Macedonia help me locate the place? References follow: Evans' account of his own participation in the ritual associated with the shrine is interesting reading for anyone with access.

• Evans, Arthur (1901). "Mycenaean Tree and Pillar Cult and Its Mediterranean Relations". Journal of Hellenic Studies. 21. London: Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies: pp. 200-204. ISSN 0075-4269. Retrieved 2008-08-06. {{cite journal}}: |pages= has extra text (help)

• Hasluck, F. W. (1929), Christianity and Islam under the Sultans, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. pp. 274-277 {{citation}}: |pages= has extra text (help)

Requested move

This article has been renamed from Wikipedia:WikiProject ROMacedonia to Wikipedia:WikiProject Republic of Macedonia as the result of a move request.

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was - unopposed move to less cryptic title. Keith D (talk) 20:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Suggest the less cryptic Wikipedia:WikiProject Republic of Macedonia for the page's actual name, while retaining the shortcuts. Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair Enough. Sounds good. BalkanFever 10:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Support. Aramgar (talk) 18:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

If there are any problems with the move then just give me a shout. There are a lot of sub-pages in the project and some redirects or templates may need fixing. Keith D (talk) 21:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Confusion

I'm having trouble adding interwiki links for a Macedonian article. The article on the english wiki is Saint Panteleimon, Ohrid, but on the Macedonian Wiki, it is called mk:Светите Климент и Пантелејмон (Saint Kliment And Pantaleimon). From the pictures, they are clearly referring to the same church. What is the correct name for this church? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 14:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

The monastery is called Saint Panteleimon and nicknamed Plaošnik (referring to its location). It is not called Saints Clement and Panteleimon — Saint Clement of Ohrid is the founder but Saint Panteleimon is the patron. Köbra | Könverse 15:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

So the macedonian wiki is incorrect? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 19:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Correct. Köbra | Könverse 08:10, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Прашање

Како е литературно македонски: “ДобрЕдојдовте“ или “ДобрОдојдовте“? Јас мислам дека е ова второво.. Capricornis (talk) 19:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Republic of Macedonia

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Macedonia (terminology) FAR

Macedonia (terminology) has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Ottoman Bank of Salonika and the IMRO

Can members of this project confirm with reference to reliable sources that the IMRO bombed the Ottoman Bank in Thessaloniki in 1903? Please see the following discussion of what I believe to be two unrelated Salonika committees: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Turkey#Salonika_Committee. Thanks. Aramgar (talk) 16:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Resolved. This article could stand a rewrite and better sourcing. Aramgar (talk) 00:01, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Municipalities of Macedonia - Naming

Please have a look at Category_talk:Municipalities_by_country#Naming. Do you think using "Abc Municipality" would be ok, so we come to a harmony with naming of municipalities in other countries? - LocodeMaster (talk) 19:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Treskavec monastery

Would some member of this project kindly put together an article on the Treskavec monastery near Prilep? The monastery preserves an interesting collection of documents related to the history of the region. There is a photograph and some information already at Prilep. Aramgar (talk) 17:26, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I started it off with some info. --Local hero 22:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. What an excellent start. I will need a few more days until I am back to my books and can add some useful information. The monastery's archives are relevant to the histories of many small places in Greece and Macedonia. Thanks. Aramgar (talk) 04:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I have the following reference for the archicives from Treskavec monastery: M. Sokoloski, Spomenici I-IV: Spomenici za srednovekovnata i ponovata istorija na Makedonija I-IV, Skopje, 1975, 1977, 1980, 1981. Are these documents housed at the monastery or someplace else? Aramgar (talk) 05:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Help, Trebam pomosta

I tried adding myself to the list for participants for this group but when i did it my name didnt pop up, could someone please add me on it, my username is batispecela thank you very much for the help to who ever adds me onto the list as I have already mad a few articles on Macedonia and am willing to do more! one of my projects are on Loznani

Probav da ja klaam imeto na listot za lugje koi sakaat da pomagaat za veb strani na Makedonija, no koga probaav da ja klaam imeto nemozhiv da ja vidam imeto i zatoa, ve molam na koi mozhi da me pomaga da mi ja klai imeto na Participants za ova veb strana, oti sum napisal nekolku articles za Makedonija kako Loznani, i sakaam da vi pomagam so pojke pisanje na articles za Makedonija, zatoa za koi mozi da mi ja klai imeto na ova list, Ve blagodaram nai iskreno od sto mozam za vaseto pomosta. Imeto mi e batispecela Batispecela (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 08:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC).

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Move of article Republic of Macedonia

The article on the Republic of Macedonia has recently been moved to the article Macedonia, which had earlier been a disambiguation page. Anyone interested in discussing the move may feel free to do so at Talk:Macedonia or at the thread on the move at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#A bit of a surprise move here.... Thank you. John Carter (talk) 20:08, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Featured article review

I have nominated Macedonia (terminology) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Macedonia Request for Comment

The Centralized discussion page set up to decide on a comprehensive naming convention about Macedonia-related naming practices is now inviting comments on a number of competing proposals from the community. Please register your opinions on the RfC subpages 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. This]] page deals with the conventions most directly affecting this article.This]] page deals with the conventions most directly affecting this article.This]] and this page deal with the conventions most directly affecting this article.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:25, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject TRANSWIKI

You are all invited to join WikiProject TRANSWIKI and join the Macedonian language transwiki project. The aim is to draw up a full directory of missing articles from Macedonian wikipedia (and anywhere else) and build a team of translators to work at bridging the gaps in knowledge and to improve existing articles by translation. We need your help, so if there are any Macedonian speakers here please join up as your language skills are crucial. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 16:21, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

NOTICE. Request For Comment: Changes to Naming policies which may affect WikiProject naming conventions.

Following recent changes by some editors to the Wikipedia:Naming conventions policy page, a Request For Comment, (RFC) is now being held. This is to debate the removal of the passage permitting individual WikiProject and other naming conventions to make exceptions to the standard policy of using Common Names as the titles of Wikipedia articles.

This WikiProject is being notified since it operates such a specific naming convention. Editors are invited to comment on the proposed change at this location. Xandar 02:39, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The above "notification" is a grossly biased misrepresentation of the changes under discussion. The old version of the naming conventions policy tried to lay down binding rules; we don't work that way, so it was necessary also to make explicit exceptions. The new version articulates principles, and allows for consensus to establish how they should be applied. Thus there is no longer any need for exceptions. In fact, making exceptions is nonsense, since there are no rules to make exceptions to. These changes are good for specific conventions. Xandar is trying to induce moral panic in those who stand to gain the most from this. Xandar is only opposed to the new version because he thinks the wording, not the general thrust, weakens his position in a dispute unrelated to this RfC. Don't be fooled. Hesperian 02:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

No. Don't be fooled. The proposed wording change is shown at the RFC linked in my post above. The removal of the "exceptions" phrase is a very significant change. The policy never stated that it consisted of "rules" before, and it still doesn't. However it remains policy. Simply stating a personal view that titling a section "principles" changes the status of the policy page, is one not even accepted by many editors on Hesperians side. There is already an attempt to use the principle of no exceptions to the "use common name" policy to radically change the Naming conflict page, and one of the proposers of this change has indicated that the guidance on flora is also targetted. The change is in my view an attempt to impose a rigid, top-down policy on naming which ignores what wikipedia editors on the ground find most useful. Xandar 03:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Dolno Gradishte

Would someone care to take a look at the above article and perhaps turn it into a WP:DYK? It looks like it has potential and I am sure the user would appreciate the help. Kind regards.Calaka (talk) 08:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Coat of arms

I heard from several sources that the state arms of Macedonia is changing to remove the red star. I know this has produced several images online, but I wish to make a request. With the emblem that has the star, there is at least 5 drawings used on this site. For this new arms, I wish we can come up with just one image that can be used all over the place. I don't want to have everyone uploading their own version and call it the true one. I want to work with you yall to create such an image. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:45, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Peer review at Republic of Macedonia

Requesting some feedback on this article, which would be deeply appreciated. See the peer review here for my comments of what kind of feedback I'm after. Best wishes, Fritzpoll (talk) 13:53, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Map won't show up on Morodvis article

Resolved

I was tidying up the Morodvis article, but I cannot get the pushpin map to work.

I looked at the Ohrid and the Skopje articles, which also use Template:Location map Republic of Macedonia, and the markup appears to be correct, but no map is showing up!

Any help would be much appreciated. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:46, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

• It seems to be working now - I didn't do anything to it since, and it wasn't showing, but it is now! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:19, 28 November 2009 (UTC)