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. As usual, I discount opinions who appear to be motivated by their writers' ethnic or national background instead of Wikipedia policies, particularly the last four "delete" opinions. A merger discussion, taking into account the concerns highlighted by Fut. Perf, might be worthwhile, though.  Sandstein  18:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Macedonian language naming dispute (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

WP:OR. WP:POV. WP:NEO. The article is based on personal ideas over an imaginary Macedonian Language Dispute. There are neither sources from the acclaimed disputing party nor it is stated in what instance is this dispute taken precisely. It is a mainly POV article, constructed on Original Research and personal thought and beliefs. Some unrelated arguments are used (Like the Republic of Macedonia constitutional name dispute) to add a more convincing tone to the POV expressed. WP:NEO.WP:OR In the article are presented some original ideas as alternative names for the Macedonian Language and Republic of Macedonia, with a clear intent of defamation and spreading disinformation. As seen on the talk page reactions, this creative terms are pretty offending: "Skopian Language", "Bulgaroskopian language", "Bulgaro-Macedonian language", "Slavic Dialect language" and "State of Skopje". This article is in clear contrast with the cardinal content policies of Wikipedia: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, and Wikipedia:No original research and should be deleted. Alex Makedon (talk) 00:03, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but consider some merging with other articles. I'm not too convinced of the nomination above. Although I do agree that the article gives some amount of undue weight to polemic and derogatory naming preferences (such as "Skopian"), the bulk of the presentation is useful and NPOV. But we have simply too many articles in this domain than can be usefully maintained. Besides the obvious main articles such as Macedonian language, there's also the overlapping Macedonia naming dispute (about the country name), another Political views on the Macedonian language, and then even a dedicated subarticle Bulgarian views on the Macedonian language. Can too much coverage of an issue become a problem on Wikipedia? Yes. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It becomes a problem especially if it's a fringe view (Bulgarian thing) or some largely ignored "disambiguation" issue. Sure, some Greek scholars (apparently not linguists) have said that the language should not be called Macedonian, but the Greek government hasn't complained to the UN (which lists it simply as Macedonian) like it has with the name of the country. As you once said FP, 99% of the time the language is called "Macedonian" full stop. This looks like a glorified list of alternate names accounting for 1% of reference to the language. BalkanFever 08:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Future Perfect Can you state in what manner this immaginary "language dispute" overlaps with the constitutional Macedonia name dispute held by the UN?

• Keep this article serves to keep extensive and tedious discussion of the name of the Macedonian language out of the main article on said language. Part of the problem is that it is not possible to rid Wikipedia of these fringe views, so it makes sense in this case to have them isolated. - Francis Tyers · 12:35, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • you are basicly admitting that this article is full of inaccuracy, POV, personal opinion and unverified facts but suggest that we should keep this false information on a Wikipedia page just for the disruptive editors to vent their tedious unargumented discussions on it!?

• Keep Notable (if stupid) conflict. Sourced, no problems there. WilyD 14:07, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is stupid? The fact that the Macedonian Language is recognized as such by the UN, The European Council, and all the major international bodies, and we have an article that is calling it with names at pleasure? Or the fact that this invented "language name dispute" is at most un unofficial personal opinion of some individuals? Sorced!? Some insignificant web page [1] and other few cherry picked dubious sources will correct the European Council [2], the UN[3], and the Macedonians[4] that there are alternative "names" for this language and that it is disputed!?
    • I don't follow your questions. It's a stupid subject for a dispute. But the dispute is real and notable - just goes to prove people are dumb. WilyD 15:11, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • "But the dispute is real and notable" what is "real" and "notable" about it? A single web page and few cherry picked (non linguist) greek scholars? Can you support your clames by any evidence or they are just your personal opinion on the matter? (I also inform you that its the second time you use personal offences, first "stupid" now "dumb" correct your statements or you will get reported)Alex Makedon (talk) 08:47, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • He's telling you that the language naming dispute is stupid, not you or your arguments, stupid but notable. Got it now ?--Zakronian (talk) 10:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yeah, if anything it's the Greeks who should be pissed off, not you. Think about it a little, and stop seeing nothing but enemies all around you. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 10:52, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - definite. The subject is presented quite NPOV in my view. It's not like this is not a major issue, now is it? Next you someone might nominate the Naming dispute article and state there's no such thing - will this be the case then? --Laveol ^T 13:39, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or merge. There is no such thing as ,,Macedonian language naming dispute‘‘. Even the Greek officials have clearly stated that the dispute is over the country's name, and not language or identity: The name of the state is of decisive importance. Negotiations are carried out on this. There is no negotiation, as Skopje would want or as it seemed they wanted, on other matters that would divert negotiations from our objective. Bomac (talk) 16:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I will not even vote here. It is however no coincidence that this user started an AfD virtually as soon as another AfD had finished and did not go his way. Sounds like WP:BATTLE. And this not a long time after his disruptive push to change another article from status quo [5] which basically was based on the same principle as this AfD, that anything "Macedonian" refers only to things related to the Republic of Macedonia and Macedonian Slavs. --Avg (talk) 20:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have in mind that WP:NOT_YOUR_OR_FRIENDS_INVENTION. Bomac (talk) 21:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The same can be said of you. BalkanFever 01:53, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • What did I invent? The people which were exiled from their homes? Bomac (talk) 09:50, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Avg, apparently you haven't even bothered to read the talk page of the article, othervise you would have seen that the deletion is proposed since 27 February 2008 and I have been involvedd since 22 September 2008 and as such has nothing to do with the proposed deletion of the Exodus of Ethnic Macedonians from Greece aticle from 29 October 2008.Alex Makedon (talk) 14:20, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: What is the point of this article? What is it trying to show? That some people call the Macedonian language as something other than just simply, Macedonian? The article just waffles on and uses outdated and offensive language. Unless some one is willing to actually turn this into an encyclopedic article then i cannot see why it shouldnt be removed. Also we already have another article to deal with this issue: Political views on the Macedonian language. PMK1 (talk) 00:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I find it personally offensive when someone tries to dispute what I call my own language. The same goes for my nationality and my country. Crnorizec (talk) 03:23, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or Fundamentally Rewrite There is no such thing as Macedonian language dispute - the Macedonian language exists and it is studied at many universities around the world. The above named article is mostly composed of ultra-nationalistic bias and POV from both Bulgarian and Greek sources. The article contains mostly hate speech. It is the same as if there was article that purports to seriously discuss the origin of such terms as 'Nigger', 'Chink', 'Wop', etc. 'Skopian', 'Bulgaro-Skopian' etc. is hate speech used in Greece by the ultra-nationalistic circles. Not even the Greek government-controlled media uses it. It is similar to the the hate speech used in R.Macedonia by the ultra-nationalists like 'Christian Turks' or 'Gypsies' for the Greeks and 'Tataro-Mongols' for the Bulgarians. None of that language has any place in an encyclopedia. Capricornis (talk) 04:39, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can assure you that none in Greece refers to the official language of FYROM with the name "Macedonian language". It is not only the Greek ultra-nationalistic circles; it is all the people, politicians and media. It is all the Greeks, either in Greece or in the diaspora. No Greek media uses the term "Macedonian language" referring to this this language, either government-controlled or commercial ones. The dispute over the name of this language is a real one and exists. --Hectorian (talk) 13:55, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm very interesting, how about you raise an AfD on Grecomans then?--Avg (talk) 18:09, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I can assure you that Macedonian is codified and studied at universities around the world, one example being |Macquarie University which offers a complete undergraduate program since 1984 (most other universities offer graduate programs). The Greeks disputing its existence is like the Chinese disputing the existence of Taiwan - it doesn't change the truth. Capricornis (talk) 06:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Any content of value can be merged to Political views on the Macedonian language. It simply is not acceptable to keep a bad article as a place to sweep all the fringey stuff. Jd2718 (talk) 06:23, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment Agreed. Much more appropriate title. Crnorizec (talk) 13:32, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The dispute over this language's name is an ongoing one, as is its status as a distinct language, whether my fellow neighbours like it or not. The nominator believes that terms like "Skopian Language", "Bulgaroskopian language", "Bulgaro-Macedonian language", "Slavic Dialect language" and "State of Skopje" are offending. I would like to remind him that when the term "Macedonia(n)" is used in reference to the people and state of FYROM is also a matter of offense for the Greeks (but I -nor any other Greek Wikipedian- have ever nominated the respective articles for deletion). As I have said in the past, if they believe they have the right to call themselves, their language and country "Macedonian", the Greeks also have the right to refer to them with any name they feel is appropriate; and this name for long has been "Skopjeans", "Skopjean language" and "Skopjean state". The article in question is sourced and its existance is clearly justified. And since the last current trend in Wikipedia is to point at editors this, allow me to point it at them. --Hectorian (talk) 13:55, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment: Any disputes should go in this article: Political views on the Macedonian language (as proposed by Jd2718), because that's what they are - political. Why they are political? Because the dispute on the name of the country, language and nation go in hand with the policy of denial of the right to existence of my nation. So it's politics. A racist one, for that matter... Since at least 120 years ago the language has been referred to as Macedonian, even by its adversaries. So there is no serious dispute on the name, except the one recently invented by our nice neighbours. Crnorizec (talk) 21:06, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*Merge or Delete anything that can be discussed here can always be put into Political views of the Macedonian language. The article really doesnt have a point. PMK1 (talk) 00:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I find it offensive disputing about a nation's language. Patkica (talk) 13:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Much of this article seems to be an excuse to include pejorative terms of ethnic Macedonians on Wikipedia. The rest can be merged into Political views on the Macedonian language. --Local hero 1:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

• Delete First off, there is no "Macedonian language dispute." The Macedonian language has been officially recognized by UN and other organizations, and I have not heard Greece speaking about anything other then a Macedonia name dispute. Also, there is hatred on this page used simply to express slanger towards Macedonians, including statements like "Skopjans" "SlavoBulgarian" and etc... its equivalent to having an "African American ethnicity dispute" where White radicals state they are "niggers" and use b.s. sources. Mactruth (talk) 01:50, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. No comment needed, wikipedia has become a play sand for the Greeks. They are simply for ignorance.Vlatko (talk) 02:35, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep No brainer. Given the comments by both sides and the numerous historical complexities I think its pretty obvious there is indeed an existing and ongoing legitimate dispute over the language name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.161.240.216 (talk) 07:14, 5 February 2009 (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.