User talk:Jingiby/Archive 1

Archive 1

Correction in Birthdate

Hi Jingiby,

You reverted a change of birthdate for Baba Vanga article. However, please see the history of article. Somebody changed the date last september without any citation. So now the birth date is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Watinois (talk • contribs) 19:19, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

I have provided reliable source. Don't worry. Jingiby (talk) 05:33, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Tartaria mud-flood "conspiracy theory"

In your article, the tone of the "conspiracy theory" section is dismissive and judgemental from the writers viewpoint and not objective. If you personally disagree with a theory this is irrelevant to describing it. It's like saying I don't think God exists so that is what shall be written on Wikipedia. Instead of describing why people believe God exists. Try to be objective without using biased language to describe something. I removed the dismissive elements from the post and added extra info about the justification for this theory including mentioning the photo evidence from the 1800's. It is not just "some building have basements", there are numerous examples of doors, windows, archways, columns etc all submerged for no apparent reason, this is found universally. Look into liquefaction for how mud floods could occur. You are not the authority on this subject so try not to let your ego get in the way of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TommyKnowledge (talk • contribs) 19:10, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, but I am not the owner of this article. Greetings. Jingiby (talk) 19:16, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, so why then do you get to make the decision about the edit? It seems strange for you to not allow me to make the section more objective in it's tone and to add some extra info about the rationale behind the theory. TommyKnowledge (talk) 19:30, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks

Jingiby,

Thank you for your help in creation of the Article on the President of Macedonian Academy (MANU) Ljupčo Kocarev.178.148.119.189 (talk) 20:48, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

You are welcome. Jingiby (talk) 02:16, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello!

So, let me tell you this, Independent Macedonia never officialy happened, when Bulgaria was annexed by allies, that part of Macedonia was given to Serbia, you can see by many maps that the borders between Serbia and that land of “independent Macedonia” wasn’t there, the state was also proposed, and not even recognised by Germans, only by Macedonians, making it basically useless state.. and Serbian NedicFan88 (talk) 03:25, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi, may you provide reliable sources supporting your claims? For example: Bulgaria was annexed, today North Macedonia was given to Serbia, that state was recognized by "Macedonians", etc.Thanks.--Jingiby (talk) 05:59, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Question on toponyms

Hi Jingiby,

How's thing's? Hope all is good. :) I have a question. I can't remember where exactly or which editors it was that said or wrote it, but some time back going from memory, there was mention of a set formula agreed to in wiki many years ago as to how to place Macedonian/Bulgarian toponyms to villages in Greek Macedonia, where applicable. If you have the link to where that was decided (so i can refer to if the need arises), it would be much appreciated. I have created some articles of recent date and a few will probably need those placenames added. Best Resnjari (talk) 07:26, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi Resnjari, there is nothing in my memory of this case, and I could not find anything specific on the subject. It occurs to me that it is logical to write first the Bulgarian name, and then the Macedonian one, at least in alphabetical order, and the Macedonian language was codified later. If there is anything else on the subject that I can help with? Regards! Jingiby (talk) 08:54, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

wp:burden

Please note that if uncited material is removed, you are of course free to re-add it. But only if you supply an RS ref. Per wp:burden. Which of course accords with your edit summary elsehwhere (here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pavel_Shatev&diff=prev&oldid=1082419929). It is indeed an improvement to follow wp rules, and this is a clear one. --2603:7000:2143:8500:40BF:E5B8:B099:CEDD (talk) 06:03, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

You are right. I have corrected my edit. Jingiby (talk) 06:52, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Biased agenda

From all the people, look who decided to show up. What a coincidence that you landed on the article Clock tower (Kratovo)! It almost seems that you track and follow the edits of the Macedonian users. When talking about something biased, look at yourself in a mirror.Dandarmkd (talk) 22:58, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I just follow Wikipedia rules, not editort. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 05:00, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Онази снимка от 1944/45? на сърби, посрещащи българската войска някъде в Поморавието? с плакат "Живела братска бугарска армиjа" (почти съм сигурен, че това пишеше)

Здравей отново:) Във връзка с вчерашната ни размяна на съобщения се сетих за въпросната снимка (описана в заглавието и която бях качил в Уикимедия, но която ми я изтриха за жал, като почти всички останали стари снимки заради "копирайт" >:( @№$%§$!) и се чудех, не може ли по някакъв начин като я намериш (аз не я вече търсейки в Гугъл, ще трябва явно по-подробно търсене), да я качиш. Ти си качил много хубави снимки пак от участието на България срещу Германия и не ти правят проблем с копирайта. Безумно е щото при мен ми искаха за всички тия снимки буквално разрешение от фотографите lol. А аз бях посочил каквото и ти - източник, инфо, година. Но уви. Та, хубаво ще е, ако я намериш тази снимка, да я качиш при статията за българското участие във ВСВ, твоите (за радост) не ги трият:) Поздрави, Ентусиастъ/Entusiast (talk) 08:15, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Ентусиастъ/Entusiast, тази фотография е от Белград в края на май 1945 година, когато българските войски се завръщат през Югославия към България. Jingiby (talk) 10:32, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Jingiby:, благодаря за разяснението. Ако я намериш (или ако я имаш) и я качиш ще е добре. Сега като търсех пак, успях да намеря въпросната снимка, но първо, че в колаж с друга втора пак от същия период и събития (което не е проблем, защото може просто да се изреже), но беше в лошо качество - от някаква стара/повредена статия. Иначе, поздравявам те за големия ти принос по темите Македония, Поморавие и т.н. в EN wiki :) Историческата истина трябва да се защитава. Ентусиастъ/Entusiast (talk) 13:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

За съжаление и аз откривам само споменатия от теб сдвоен вариант с лошо качество в мрежата. Оригиналът някъде се е потурчил. Ако го открия ще го кача. Ако ти го откриеш някъде и не си забравил, можеш да ме подсетиш. Поздрав! Jingiby (talk) 16:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Would you consider becoming a New Page Reviewer?

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. () Hi Jingiby, I've recently been looking for editors to invite to join the new page reviewing team, and after reviewing your editing history, I think you would be a good candidate. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; the new page reviewing team needs help from experienced users like yourself. Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision (if it looks daunting, don't worry, most pages are easy to review, and habits are quick to develop). If this looks like something that you can do, please consider joining us. If you choose to apply, you can drop an application over at WP:PERM/NPR. If you have questions, please feel free to drop a message on my talk page or at the reviewer's discussion board. Cheers, and hope to see you around, (t · c) buidhe 22:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi User:Buidhe. Thank you very much for your invitation to become a new pages reviewer. Now I am going to read the tutorial and later a will make my decision. To be honest, I am a bit worry. Regards.Jingiby (talk) 15:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

No worries, it's 100% WP:VOLUNTEER (t · c) buidhe 16:42, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Report IP

Hi! According to my research, this range of IPs [[1]] is vandalized every day on sites related to Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro, Serbia and Macedonia. Please pay attention to the editing of that IP range and if the vandalism continues please report it to someone in charge to block it. Thanks78.3.85.128 (talk) 08:05, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 10:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Warning

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but your recent edits appear to be intentional disruptions designed to illustrate a point. Edits designed for the deliberate purpose of drawing opposition, including making edits you do not agree with or enforcing a rule in a generally unpopular way, are highly disruptive and can lead to a block or ban. If you feel that a policy is problematic, the policy's talk page is the proper place to raise your concerns. If you simply disagree with someone's actions in an article, discuss it on the article talk page or, if direct discussion fails, through dispute resolution. If consensus strongly disagrees with you even after you have made proper efforts, then respect the consensus, rather than trying to sway it with disruptive tactics. Thank you. Voritlas (talk) 06:42, 11 June 2022 (UTC) Voritlas (talk) 06:45, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Second warning

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but your recent edits appear to be intentional disruptions designed to illustrate a point. Edits designed for the deliberate purpose of drawing opposition, including making edits you do not agree with or enforcing a rule in a generally unpopular way, are highly disruptive and can lead to a block or ban. If you feel that a policy is problematic, the policy's talk page is the proper place to raise your concerns. If you simply disagree with someone's actions in an article, discuss it on the article talk page or, if direct discussion fails, through dispute resolution. If consensus strongly disagrees with you even after you have made proper efforts, then respect the consensus, rather than trying to sway it with disruptive tactics. Thank you. Voritlas (talk) 09:31, 11 June 2022 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Voritlas (talk • contribs)  

New page reviewer granted

Hi Jingiby. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

File:Archbishop Ohrid mantle.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Archbishop Ohrid mantle.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Veverve (talk) 08:22, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022

New Page Review queue June 2022

Hello Jingiby,

Backlog status

At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000 at the end of May.

Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.

In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).

While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).

Backlog drive

A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.

TIP – New school articles

Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.

Misc

There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:

Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 10556 articles, as of 12:00, 15 May 2024 (UTC), according to DatBot

There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.

Reminders

• Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
• If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
• If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
• To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Notes

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!

New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 July, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 20:25, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 06:50, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Article "Demographics of North Macedonia"

Hello Jingiby, In the article "Demographics of North Macedonia" I deleted the details for the years 2015, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020 in the table "Newborns in North Macedonia according to ethnic group". But you have reversed my change. It would be more useful if the data were listed in 10-year intervals than if the data were listed for each year. The figures vary only slightly from year to year. Otherwise the table becomes too large and confusing. Do you agree with this? Kind regards, Anna 2A0A:A547:33E5:0:F500:E87C:6559:6AB6 (talk) 09:36, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Ok. Jingiby (talk) 09:45, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Social Democratic Union of Macedonia

How my edit was without adequate explanation? That content that I removed didn't even include a citation and mostly that info is mentioned again in "History" and the "Elections" sections in more detail. Also they way it was written it's not very good to Wikipedia standards . As for the record this page lacks citations S.G ReDark (talk) 01:30, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Maybe this section could be reduced significantly to just give a quick summary of the party? S.G ReDark (talk) 01:36, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Reported at WP:ANI

Hi Jingiby, I reported your recent disruptive editing in the articles on the Macedonian language and on Hristijan Mickoski at the administrators' noticeboard and requested a ban from the topic "Macedonia". I don't think that a user should be blocked for disruptive editing on a single topic, so a topic ban should be the most efficient measure in this case. Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:01, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Peperuda

Check my sandbox and Dodola article, am preparing a major new revision for the article which current revision has many serious issues due to negligence (copyright infringement, fringe theories, name etc.). Can you help find me the source for the Peperuda song in Bulgarian? Other information would be also appreciated. Miki Filigranski (talk) 13:05, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi Miki Filigranski. What I find in the article in Bulgarian is that the first written mention of this custom in Bulgaria is by Spiridon Gabrovski, a Bulgarian clergyman and enlightened worker. In his "Short history of the Bulgarian Slavic people", completed in 1792, is described the veneration of a hero called Perun or Peperud. Below is a rough translation of a folk song dedicated to this custom:

A butterfly flew

give, god, rain, (2)

from plowman to digger,

to give birth to wheat, millet,

wheat, millet and wheat,

to feed orphans,

orphans and poor.

The source is: Календарни празници и обичаи на българите. София, Издателство на Българската академия на науките „Проф. Марин Дринов“, 2015. ISBN 978-954-322-764-8. с. 66 – 68. Jingiby (talk) 13:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks!--Miki Filigranski (talk) 13:50, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Spiridon Gabrovski

Hi thanks for creating this article. When we translate or borrow from other language wikis it’s a requirement to acknowledge the source. The best way to do this is to include it in your edit summary (e.g. “translated from bg.wiki”) and there’s also a translation template you can add to the talk page. If you can confirm where material for this article was sourced I’ll add the template to the talk page for you. Happy editing and please leave a message on my talk page if you need any help Mccapra (talk) 06:06, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Please read...

Hello. Be so kind and have a thorough read of our protection policy, if you haven't done so already. Protection is one instrument we use when there is heavy disruption; it's only a last resort in a way. Regards. Lectonar (talk) 11:16, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:D pop g berovski ku.jpg

The file File:D pop g berovski ku.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused. Superseded by File:Dimitar-Popgeorgiev-portrait.jpg.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:53, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022

New Page Review queue August 2022

Hello Jingiby,

Backlog status

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators Buidhe and Zippybonzo, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to Dr vulpes who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.

Coordination

MB and Novem Linguae have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out. MPGuy2824 will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.

Open letter to the WMF

The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.

TIP - Reviewing by subject

Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.

New reviewers

The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.

Reminders

• Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
• If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
• If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
• To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Macedonians (obsolete terminology)

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from http://docplayer.net/41045898-U-ottawa-l-universittf-canadievme-canada-s-university.html, which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please let me know if you have any questions. — Diannaa (talk) 13:15, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, this is possible. I really have used this work for 2 sentences, but maybe you can show the exact sentence that fits this work and it to be reworked. For sure it was not intentional from my side. Most of the article was based on absolutely different sources. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 16:24, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was manually assessed by myself. The content is inside a citation (which is why Earwig's tool shows nothing; it doesn't look inside citations). Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found. Perhaps you intended it to be a quotation? If so, you need quotation marks and a citation that points to the source. I have undone the revision deletion temporarily so you can assess. — Diannaa (talk) 19:06, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP message

Hi Jingiby,

Invitation

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:10, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Ukrainian identity

First mentions of Ukraine is dated back to 12th century in the Tale of Igor’s Campaign against Polovtsy in 1185. Don't even try this 20th century propaganda here. Dmytro91 (talk) 17:18, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Dmytro91. Per Wikipedia: From the 18th century on, Ukraine became known in the Russian Empire by the geographic term Little Russia.[7]: 183–184  In the 1830s, Nikolay Kostomarov and his Brotherhood of Saints Cyril and Methodius in Kyiv started to use the name Ukrainians. It was also taken up by Volodymyr Antonovych and the Khlopomany ("peasant-lovers"), former Polish gentry in Eastern Ukraine, and later by the Ukrainophiles in Halychyna, including Ivan Franko. The evolution of the meaning became particularly obvious at the end of the 19th century.[7]: 186  The term is also mentioned by the Russian scientist and traveler of Ukrainian origin Nicholas Miklouho-Maclay (1846–1888). At the turn of the 20th century the term Ukraine became independent and self-sufficient, pushing aside regional self-definitions.[7]: 186  In the course of the political struggle between the Little Russian and the Ukrainian identities, it challenged the traditional term Little Russia (Малороссия, Malorossiya) and ultimately defeated it in the 1920s during the Bolshevik policy of Korenization and Ukrainization.[12][13] Jingiby (talk) 07:36, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Mehmed pasha Sokolovic

Hello Jingiby, can you please warn user Shadow4ya to stop persistently removing my recent edits from the Sokollu Mehmed Pasha article. It is about his origin in which I wrote: "There is great dispute among historians about his origins. According to some historians, he was of Bosniak origin, while others claim that he was of Serbian origin" (sources were listed)

Since there are different opinions among historians about its origin, I have presented both theories, of course quoting from several sources. He thinks "consensus must be reached before any new change can be applied", but again the article talks about one side of the story while ignoring the other. There will never be any consensus on its origin because everyone has their own opinion that should be respected. For example, in the article about Rustem Pasha Opuković, all three theories about his origin are presented, since only one cannot be taken. Please revert my recent edits. Thank you in advance. Mrjazz123 (talk) 13:08, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mrjazz123, I don't think there is any serious dispute about it. Bosnian national identity crystallized in the second half of the 20th century. Jingiby (talk) 06:51, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

not true. Bosnian identity has existed since the Middle Ages. In the Middle ages, the ethnonym good Bosniak (dobri Bošnjanin) was not a geographical reference for the inhabitants along the Bosna river, but it was referred to the population of the entire medieval Bosnia, regardless of religion, which can be seen in various charters of the 14th and 15th centuries during the reign of ban Stjepan II Kotromanić, ban Tvrtko I Kotromanić, King Stjepan Ostoja, etc. In these charters, Bosnian rulers mention good Bosniaks as witnesses (Source: Codex dipomaticus regni bosnae, Sarajevo 2018). I wrote about this on the "Bošnjani" article on this wiki. During the Ottoman rule, all people of Bosnia were also named as Bosniaks, because at that time there was no Serb and Croat nation in Bosnia. Even the Ottoman administration names all the inhabitants of Bosnia as Bosniaks (Bosnali). In the second half of the 19th century, under the influence of Serbian and Croatian national propaganda (Ilija Garašanin, Klement Božić, Teofil Petranović, etc.), Serbian and Croatian national consciousness spread among Bosnian Orthodox and Catholics, who until then were either nationally undecided or simply declared themselves Bosniaks. To say that Bosniak national identity "crystallised" in the second half of the 20th century is illogical and against all historical facts. Bosniaks during Yugoslavia were not recognized as a separate ethnic nation and had no right to declare their ethnicity. According to John Fine and Donia: "Bosnian's identity as a Bosnian - even if it is originally reffered to his geographical homeland or state membership - has roots going back many centuries - whereas classification of any Christian Bosnian as a Serb or Croat goes back barely a century".

Mrjazz123 (talk) 13:55, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Dimitar Talev

Hello Jingiby, in regards to your revert of my edits on Dimitar Talev's article: 1. I dispute the relevance of having 2 sentences on copyright violations, which happen all the time to almost all authors. A similar example is the case of copyright violation of the works of Ivan Vazov, yet for some reason that is not mentioned in his page. 2. I dispute the reliability and verifiability of the source, as it is not an English language source. Furthermore, the source also mentions statements by close family members (particularly in the sentence you reverted), which oftentimes are not taken into account as they are biased i.e are not independent of the topic that they are covering, per WP:BIASED. 3. Even according to the source you have given, the Ministry issued the complaint due to a copyright violation. Nothing else.

Due to the above mentioned reasons I am inclined to the removal of the section completly.

And on the topic of constructive editing - I'm sure you are aware that the article may be expanded with text translated from the corresponding article in Bulgarian, per the banner from July 2018, as I'm aware that you are a Bulgarian speaker.

Best regards. Kluche (talk) 11:54, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello Kluche. I understand your concerns, but this information you have removed is reliable. I don't want to go into details, but here you can see comparisons of the original and the manipulated translation of a book by Talev in North Macedonia. There is information also you can find here, that the heirs of Talev and a Bulgarian publishing house are judging the publishing house that translated these books in North Macedonia. Otherwise, the issue of the manipulated translation of the books was also discussed in the European Parliament. Check here. Also here is an interview of Talev's relative from a few days ago. The man is a doctor of constitutional law and claims that it is absolutely unacceptable in the 21st century to falsify a writer's work in a country that aspires to become a member of the European Union. Greetings. Jingiby (talk) 12:43, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Again, the source you gave in the article is biased and unrealiable, as it cites statements given by people not independent of the topic, which goes against WP:BIASED.

The Bulgarian ministry issued the inquire due to a copyright violation, nothing else.

As I said previously, I fail to see the relevance of having one particular case of copyright violation mentioned in the article,I gave examples of other (Bulgarian) author(s) whose copyright has been infrigned, however that is not covered in their article(s).

Lest we forget that all of these sources are neither academic, nor in English.

Hence why I'm inclined to remove the section.

Greetings. Kluche (talk) 13:17, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't think you know the rules here at all. Jingiby (talk) 13:46, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Do you deem a statement by a close relative of the person is at the center of the topic as a non-biased source? Per the Biased or opinionated sources section, the source needs to have a "level of independence from the topic the source is covering". I fail to see how the statement of a close family member of the person in the center of the topic, cited by the first source you gave, can have such degree of independence.

Per your own logic, the statements about Goce Delcev made by his niece should be considered and presented as factual, yet they are not.

The second source you gave is an opinion article, so inherently POV. The article literally states that it's an opinion article.

I'm also inclined to believe that your statement is a threat.

Best regards. Kluche (talk) 14:17, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Then I will add another sourced info, regarding this case, but related to the Bulgarian President. Thanks.Jingiby (talk) 15:13, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Board of Trustees election

Thank you for supporting the NPP initiative to improve WMF support of the Page Curation tools. Another way you can help is by voting in the Board of Trustees election. The next Board composition might be giving attention to software development. The election closes on 6 September at 23:59 UTC. View candidate statement videos and Vote Here. MB 03:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok. Jingiby (talk) 05:18, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Macedonian Struggle

Hi Jingiby. I've noticed the article Macedonian Struggle is very Greek-centered. You might desire to take a look and perhaps edit the article. I will add some information myself soon. The Macedonian Struggle was a very bloody conflict encompassing multiple nations and I think it's unacceptable to present it as only part of Greek history. Super Ψ Dro 11:52, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Super, this article was all pro-Greek to begin with, but there is still a lot of work to be done on it to NPOV. Jingiby (talk) 12:06, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Stracin-Kumanovo operation source

Hello @Jingiby. I noticed that you removed my revert in regards to the source you've given for the confiscated лв.430 million. I've seen how you've been treating Macedonian communist-era sources i.e viewing them as unreliable. The source which you added is based on a 1970 publication, fitting in that criteria. Kluche (talk) 18:23, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

The information in the Macedonian source I cited has been confirmed by another reliable source, provided by an academic publishing house. The second publication in Bulgarian is after the fall of communism and meets the criteria about reliability. In this case, the information in both sources concurres and has been verified. Jingiby (talk) 19:32, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Siege of Plevna

You reverted my change of 100.000 casualties (including civilians) from Turks by argumenting that it wasn't given any source. I had given sources which is W. Herbert's "The Defence of Plevna" p. 393. Why did you think it is without source because I checked and I saw I had shared source. Tartridrad (talk) 22:43, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

This is unreliable primary source. The Defence of Plevna, 1877 by Herbert, Frederick William Von. was published in 1895 and is out of date. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 04:53, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

W. Herbert is soldier who served in Ottoman Army in Siege of Plevna (1878) and he wrote very detailed book by using European historians. Writing his book 18 years later doesn't mean he is unreliable. I heard this firstly from you. Please share a source that it claim W. Herbert is unreliable. W. Herbert is most detailed source that wrote Siege of Plevna. it is best source about Siege of Plevna. Tartridrad (talk) 10:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Tartridrad, please, read Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (history). Primary sources as that above are not reliable here. To weight different views and structure an article so as to avoid original research and synthesis the common views of scholars should be consulted. In many historical topics, scholarship is divided, so several scholarly positions should be relied upon. Some people masquerading as scholars actually present fringe views outside of the accepted practice, and these should not be used. To determine scholarly opinions about a historical topic, consult the following sources in order:

1. Recent scholarly books and chapters on the historiography of the topic.
2. "Review Articles", or historiographical essays that explicitly discuss recent scholarship in an area.
3. Similarly conference papers that were peer reviewed in full before publication.
4. Journal articles or peer reviewed conference papers that open with a review of the historiography, etc. Jingiby (talk) 10:11, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

I still wait a source claim that W. Herbert isn't reliable. I will read other references in Siege of Plevna article and I am 100% sure that they used W. Herbert book because it is reliable source. My source is primary source written by eye witness as well as he referenced articles written in his period and he extensively mentioned Russian sources in his book. Therefore, this is not only a memorial, it is academic work. Tartridrad (talk) 10:49, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

If you find a contemporary academic source that interprets his conclusions, then that would be a credible secondary source. Greetings. Jingiby (talk) 10:55, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

I think this is bad idea because this is already academic source discuss other contemporary academic sources published in journals in the period. You are talking like this is 9th BC century manuscript. I can show tents of article that only use primary source in Wikipedia. You firstly said that this source is written 19 years later, thus it is unreliable which is wrong judgement. I realized that you changed 10,000 Romanians casualties to 70,000. What is your about 70,000 Romanians casulaties. This is wrong change. All Romanian army was like 60,000 in Siege of Plevna. What is your source about 70,000 Romanian casualties in Siege of Plevna. Tartridrad (talk) 11:22, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

You need a recent scholarly books and chapters on the historiography of the topic. Primary sources older then 130 years are WP:AGE MATTERS. Jingiby (talk) 11:36, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Okay then. What is your source about 70,000 Romanian casualties. You changed from 10,000 to 70,000 and you still show like it is written in W. Herbert. You should remove all W. Herbert referenced numbers by me. Tartridrad (talk) 11:53, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok. If something goes wrong fix it. Jingiby (talk) 12:18, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gordynia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Axios.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Spreading misinformation

Where did you even get the information that Vasojevići are an albanian tribe? Катарина.1 (talk) 11:35, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

There were 8 sources for this in the article, but they all have now been deleted from you. Jingiby (talk) 11:39, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Per source?

Какво означава това? "Анти-турски сантимент"? Такива цитати на нечии предположения за емоции имат ли място в статия за език? "По-стари учени"? Какво значение има възрастта? Имам чувството, че си имам работа със клика! Поне прочети какво са те сложили да вардиш! Utar Sigmal (talk) 06:20, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Please write in English. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 06:23, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Gotse Delchev biography

I think it is in line with MOS:LEAD to mention it. It is also emphasized that the Bulgarian revolutionaries were teachers such as:Gruev, Aleksandrov, Poparsov... Savasampion (talk) 19:51, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

This is mentioned in the lead. Just read it. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 19:53, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kanasubigi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malamir.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is section header of discussion.The discussion is about the topic topic. Thank you. 113.172.88.157 (talk) 10:27, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Macedonian nationalism - Reverts

Hello, you've deleted my edit to the article Macedonian nationalism, saying that it's just the opinion of one researcher which is contradicted by others.

Alright, so - can I see the sources that contradict what Nick Anastasovski wrote? Also, it is not Anastasovski's mere opinion if he cites Petko Rachev Slaveykov and Crawfurd Price, contemporary authors, to back his point - something that my contribution includes.

I fail to see how I'm in the wrong here, although I'm sorry that my contribution proved to be so controversial. If you have nothing against, I say we avoid a revert war and escalate it to the Arbitration Committee, which can decide whether my sources are unreliable or not. Brat Forelli (talk) 13:18, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Atanasovski's opinion is reflected already in the article. He is not a world-class scientist, so his entire thesis does not need to be transcribed here. It is more than obvious that a Bulgarian in the 19th century did not mean simply a peasant, as he claims. Apparently it's a fringe view. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 13:46, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

A few sentences don't amount to transcribing his thesis, and it does contain information that'd be quite relevant to Macedonian nationalism in 19th century.

It is more than obvious that a Bulgarian in the 19th century did not mean simply a peasant, as he claims. Apparently it's a fringe view.

Could you provide sources that state otherwise? Anastasovski does cite a book by Douglas Dakin for this claim. Brat Forelli (talk) 14:27, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

There is not a problem to cite a sources but a common sense is the best source per Wikipedia. In 1847, the Ottoman Sultan used the term Bulgarian people as an official term, in 1860 the base of a Bulgarian school system was already established, in 1870 a separate Bulgarian church was recognized, in 1876 there was a Bulgarian uprising, which played the role of a national revolution, in 1878 there was already a recognized Bulgarian state, in 1880 an independent Bulgarian army was formed, and at that time there was already a codified Bulgarian language, in 1885 Bulgaria was united with Eastern Rumelia, again on the principle of a national revolution, in the same year Bulgarian army defeated the Serbian in a war, etc. To claim that at that time a Bulgarian meant simply a peasant is ridiculous and frivolous. Jingiby (talk) 18:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Merry 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) 05:01, 25 December 2022 (UTC) Kostur Dialect Thanks for fixing the the Kostur dialect, Jingiby. Drenowe (talk) 20:02, 30 December 2022 (UTC) No problems. Jingiby (talk) 21:02, 30 December 2022 (UTC) Letter from Đorđe Pulevski. I think he wrote to Milan Obrenović, as he writes. Miloš Obrenović was not alive then. Savasampion (talk) 20:46, 30 December 2022 (UTC) The mistake is mine. Jingiby (talk) 21:06, 30 December 2022 (UTC) Requests by Georgi Pulevski to the Serbian prince Milan Obrenović, in which he defines himself as an ""Old Serb"" and asks that his books be printed in Serbian printing houses for free, as they had an educational purpose. Edit in "Vardar Macedonia" and "Aegean Macedonia" Hello, I would like to ask why my edit was removed in Vardar Macedonia. The only change I made was that I edited the description of the picture at the top right corner. I wrote that Pirin Macedonia encompasses the Blagoevgrad province. That region shares almost the exact territories as the province of Blagoevgrad and it only makes sense that it shows this information considering the other regions have information on their provinces and/or municipalities. I also rewrote "Macedonia (Greece)" as "Aegean Macedonia" because like the other regions, this was listed in the context of modern day Macedonian regions. I also think that my edit in Aegean Macedonia shouldn't be removed either. Most of the changes just cleaned up the way sentences were written to make it more understandable. You stated in your message that my edit seemed less than neutral, though I didn't change the overall statements presented on the page. It still states that many who use this name for the region use it to make an irredentist territorial claim, it still states that the term 'Aegean' may be associated with the Greeks. Stating that some Macedonians in the region use this term is not bias, it is just a fact. It may seem like so as it seems you are a Bulgarian, however the majority of the Slavs in the region that do call themselves Macedonian and do speak the Macedonian language which is important to acknowledge. Again, I did not make any case on the population number of Macedonians in the area, whether they should govern the land, nor what their history or culture is. I would say the original article had more of a biased view since it only took a stance that many Greeks have on this issue and did not consider anything else. I look forward to your response. Best regards, Flowingtown Flowingtown (talk) 16:47, 13 January 2023 (UTC) Hello Flowingtown, I would like to make the following clarifications about the changes in your edits that I do not agree with. Regarding the article about Vardar Macedonia, your addition that it borders on the east with Pirin Macedonia, which includes Blagoevgrad province, is incorrect. Pirin Macedonia also covers a small part of the Kyustendil province. In addition, the term Aegean Macedonia, which was added instead of Greek Macedonia, is considered nationalist in Greece, so this change is not good either, and it is better to keep the former version - Greek Macedonia, as more neutral. Now for the article about Aegean Macedonia. The spelling of the name in Bulgarian was removed from the article, and without any explanation. This despite the fact that in the article itself it is written that this term appeared for the first time in Bulgaria, i.e. in Bulgarian. Other details were also removed, such as the rejection of the irredentist term United Macedonia by those, living in the Greek part of the region. The topic is quite sensitive, so please consider your edits more carefully. Greetings.Jingiby (talk) 18:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Buneva plate Skopje 2005 bTV.bg.jpg ⚠ Thanks for uploading File:Buneva plate Skopje 2005 bTV.bg.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC) Bulgarian Article Improvements Hello Jingiby, Hope you are well, I noticed the contributions you make to Wikipedia for the Bulgarian people. I myself have done the same for many years, including adding colorized charts along with artsy styled improvements to articles. You have reverted a lot of my work and I do wish to understand how I can have work fully placed on Wikipedia because it is all correct info. I would like to work with you, as we come from the same root. We are on the same team, let’s make it work well. What thoughts, ideas or suggestions based off the previous reverts would you specify? Kaiseredit (talk) 15:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC) Hi, what I removed from your edits is something different from what I understand as an improvement. Jingiby (talk) 16:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for February 26 An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Voisava Kastrioti, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Slavic. (Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 26 February 2023 (UTC) The List of Macedonians (Ethnic group) Hello Jingby im writings this directly to you on the issues that you've caused, you've seemed to label keith brown as unreliable, which is odd since you've used his books before on Gotse Delcev, IMRO and other Macedonian revolutionaries. One similar case that you've done is with Ivan Katardžiev where you've used a single interview of his as a reliable statement that all IMRO (United) members had bulgarophile feelings even after the Comintern for the Macedonian identity, this suggest to me that Ivan Katardžiev is unreliable too which in that case i suggest you remove his opinion since it might come across a little bit hypocritical, thank you Gurther (talk) 06:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC) If i do not get a proper explanation as to why one interview is reliable to identify an entire organizations ethnicity compared to an interview about a small group, then ill remove the notes from the original Wikipedia and return it to a more stable version Gurther (talk) 06:26, 28 February 2023 (UTC) Also small note : this is disruptive editing and you've failed to consult the talk page at all before making the edits, unlike Stephen who communicated with us in the talk page in a more respectful manner and without edit warring Gurther (talk) 06:50, 28 February 2023 (UTC) Hi, I understand almost nothing of your writings. What you attribute to me is not true. Please stop your destructive behavior. Keep in mind that using multiple scholarly works and considering how all recent works of scholarship portray the encyclopedic subject is important. Different scholars will draw attention to different features of the past, even when they agree on weight or causation. Similarly, different scholars may have different views on the causes of things. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 07:24, 28 February 2023 (UTC) My grammar isnt that bad jeez. Anyways what I've said is absolutely true, you didn't participate in the conversation at all about the sources and instead had a small edit war. "Similarly, different scholars may have different views on the causes of things" Here is the problem with that, you're attempting to label one interview as a source for an entire organizations ethnicity, but when i do it for some macedo-americans its not allowed? You've stated that people have different opinions, the same thing applies to the Ivan quote, using your logic we should remove that too right? This isnt destructive at all please have Good faith towards your editors Gurther (talk) 07:32, 28 February 2023 (UTC) March 2023 Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of Macedonians (ethnic group). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at the wikis talk page, We also advise you wait for the other sides response first If you do continue to WP:ACCUSE editors or promote WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH while also removing WP:PRIMARYSOURCES you will be reported to a higher up. Gurther (talk) 15:02, 4 March 2023 (UTC) Folk Songs of the Macedonian Bulgarians hello Jingby in your recent reverts you've attempted to suggest that the correct spelling of the book in Macedonian is “Македонските Бугари“ instead of “Македонски Бугари“ im writing this to correct you Македонските Бугари - since at the end of the word it contains the prefix “те“ it means that this term is used usually to describe events in the present time while this book was written in 1860 which should be written in past tense Македонски Бугари - this term suggest overall the people who are Macedo-Bulgars in the region and can be put in any period (future, present and past) without disrupting the text i advise allowing the native speakers to do the translation instead of you, despite Bulgarian being close to Macedonian it doesn't mean you have a proper understanding of all of its structure. Gurther (talk) 13:03, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Relation to Greeks and other peoples regarding thracians How can i cite a source Ermisvader07 (talk) 16:28, 18 March 2023 (UTC) HI, check at first WP:RS and then WP:CS. Jingiby (talk) 16:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Do not initiate a argument Arguing and edit wars are very terrible ways of communication, as i've warned you before do not attempt to initiate a argument and instead structure your arguments better. I also recommend speaking English in the English wiki and not Macedonian, and if you do have sources please cite them properly. Gurther (talk) 17:09, 18 March 2023 (UTC) New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case. You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC) Mirče Acev Awhile ago you and Forbidden History had a somewhat editor war over Mirče Acev, you during the edit war added tags about the neutrality and other issues, (here) you two would have a discussion about the neutrality but it went nowhere, now its been 3 years and i tried to re-open the discussion to atleast solve this old dispute but i haven't had much of a reply, so i decided to write you this message to tell you that if you have no issues with the page Mirče Acev anymore then im removing the tags, if you do have problems please underline them here. (or in the talk page of the article). Gurther (talk) 11:29, 7 May 2023 (UTC) Ok. Jingiby (talk) 12:10, 7 May 2023 (UTC) Russo-Turkish War Apologies for a recent edit I made removing content from the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78, I had not read the talk pages discussing what I should've known was a very contentious topic. This was an especially grave error on my behalf due to the content containing mass murders and genocide accusations. Originalcola (talk) 11:47, 10 May 2023 (UTC) No problems. Jingiby (talk) 11:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC) Dispute Resolution Mr. Jingiby: It seems that we have a disagreement in the section about Ataturk's religious views. In order to resolve this disagreement, we would like to state our argument first and then listen to your argument. As we have stated before; Ataturk's atheism and agnosticism is inconclusive and the sources for this argument mainly argue that he was irreligious rather than a non-believer i.e. Deist. Therefore, the modifications to this article seek to put the sources in their proper locations and to rectify incorrect arguments As Andrew Mango points out in his book, Ataturk's choice of words, "I have no religion", Ataturk's choice of words shows that Ataturk had no religion rather than that he was a non-believer, so this and similar evidence proves that Ataturk was not an atheist or agnostic, but a religious deist. And the general opinion of historians who use it is that Ataturk was a Deist. Another example is John Calvert John's "Islamism: A Documentary and Reference Guide," by John Calvert John, on page 19, rather than calling Ataturk an atheist, he calls his actions and reforms "atheistic".  This makes this source invalid. Finally, on page 106 of the book "Atheism," written by Julian Baggini in 2009, he presents Ataturk as an atheist without citing any source to support his argument and without elaborating on it, making it a simple and unsubstantiated example. Also since the author of this book, Julian Baggini, is a philosopher, it puts him in a position that does not reflect the general views of historians. Could you please present your arguments to resolve this dispute? Thank You Orhan Emre Gurler (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2023 (UTC) Hi, Orhan Emre Gurler, I'm going to move this conversation to the article's talk page so that other editors can weigh in if they wish. Jingiby (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2023 (UTC) Wikiquote Hello, @Jingiby. In this reverting you point out that my source comes from a Wikiquote and therefore it is unacademic. However, my source does not come from Wikiquote. And it has a reference written by historian Jacob Rader Marcus and updated by historian Marc Saperstein. "Historical Khazar Correspondence provides valuable primary insights into the religious and intellectual environment of the Khazars and adress the Bulgars along with few other Turkic groups." Khazar Correspondence link here is sending us to another Wikipedia page, not a Wikiquote page. Exact quotation comes that page and it has many other information about Khazar Correspondence. If you haven't any more reason to revert, can you save my edits? Best regards, cheers, mate! Akatziri (talk) 13:07, 9 June 2023 (UTC) Hi Akatziri, my post was about famous people's quotes being stored in the Wikiquote project, and in Wikipedia it's good to have synthesized information about the same historical figure's opinion on a certain issue, supported by a secondary source. Greetings. Jingiby (talk) 13:42, 9 June 2023 (UTC) Racism against Turks It is clear from the controversial changes you have made to the Nureddin Pasha article that you are an anti-Turkish racist. Wikipedia is a site that should be neutral, you cannot write the "massacre" claims made by anti-Turkish, pro-Greek, pro-Christian sources as if they were real. If you are very sensitive about massacres, talk about the massacre, ethnic cleansing, genocide, rape, torture that Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro and Serbia did to Turks in the Balkan Wars. We know very well what your country has done in the past. And your country hasn't even apologized for it. 85.107.4.50 (talk) 14:50, 11 June 2023 (UTC) You have some mistake. This text was inserted into the article about a year ago by another editor. Check here. Jingiby (talk) 15:44, 11 June 2023 (UTC) . Double standard. In the article about the Hellenic army, you gave a reason for deleting the sentence about the massacre and ethnic cleansing by Greece and the Hellenic army: "The reason is that this text has nothing to do with the leading section." But what is that! When we open the page of the Turkish land forces article, we see "The ethnic demographics of the modern Turkish Republic were significantly impacted by the earlier Armenian genocide and the deportations of Greek-speaking, Orthodox Christian Greek people." a sentence emerges. It's okay to write sentences about ethnic cleansing & massacre in the Turkish land forces (Turkish army) article, but when you write it in the Hellenic army's article, you put forward a childish excuse such as "it has nothing to do with article". And by the way, even the Greeks and westerners themselves accept the massacres and ethnic cleansing I mentioned about the Hellenic army and Greece. Both Greeks and westerners admit that the Hellenic army massacred Turks, Albanians and Jews in Tripolitsa. Everyone accepts that the Hellenic army killed Muslims and forced them to migrate during the Balkan wars. Now I ask, what is this if not a double standard? Please respond. Thanks. 37.155.3.105 (talk) 16:59, 16 June 2023 (UTC) New pages patrol needs your help! New pages awaiting review as of June 30th, 2023. Hello Jingiby, The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help. Reminders: There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord. Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC) CS1 error on Macedonia for the Macedonians Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Macedonia for the Macedonians, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows: A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help) Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC) New sources Thank you for addition of new sources that covered one quote, much appreciated. Do you think that others should be removed as they actually have less credibility and one of them has nothing to do with the quote itself? NekSeOvajVijekGordi (talk) 18:49, 29 July 2023 (UTC) Hi, I am not sure which sources could be removed, but you may propose some and discuss about it on the talk-page of the article. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 18:53, 29 July 2023 (UTC) No problem! Same thing for you, next time use the talk page of the article to discuss with active members on that talk page before addition, as the rest of us are doing NekSeOvajVijekGordi (talk) 20:35, 29 July 2023 (UTC) The deletion of Polog front there is no point on Polog front getting deleted because it isn't similar to any page in any way deleting it randomly is nothing more than vandalizm AcEagle12 (talk) 11:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC) Changes on the Macedonian related pages Hello Jingiby I'm a editor on Wikipedia to I would just like to ask you why did you remove the red links on the IMRO article and how is the source I gave for 10,000 ottoman soldiers not reliable? Jesssiemen (talk) 14:30, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Hi Jesssiemen, please read Wikipedia:Red links and WP:RSHISTORY. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 16:06, 15 August 2023 (UTC) Bias towards turks You are always implying that turkey is "genocidal", but you are reverting all edits that mentions greek atrocities against non-greeks. What kind of hypocrisy is this? Free encyclopedia is dead. 176.220.234.220 (talk) 12:48, 21 August 2023 (UTC) There is a section called Massacres in the article and it redirects to a separate article called Massacres during the Greek Revolution. Jingiby (talk) 12:50, 21 August 2023 (UTC) You might find this very enlightening Due to your recent interaction with user:Göktuğ538538 at the Siege of Shkodra, I ran an Editor interaction analysis. You might find it interesting. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:13, 26 August 2023 (UTC) New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here. You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC) Stop maintaining the spread of misleading information in the article Bulgars Jingiby, you may be blocked from editing too, if you continue your mission of maintaining the spread of misleading information in the article Bulgars. MiltenR (talk) 06:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC) Using Kommersant, a newspaper published in Russia and mostly devoted to politics and business, to prove the origin of the Bulgars is ridiculous. Please, stick to secondary, academic publications and discuss on talk to gain a consensus before introducing significant biased changes you try to push in the articles related to Bulgars. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 06:28, 18 September 2023 (UTC) Using the brain is the most important thing. The news is that the President of the Bulgar National Congress, Gusman Khalilov appealed to the European Court of Human Rights on the issue of renaming the Tatars into Bulgars, but in 2010 he lost in court. Modern Volga Bulgars doesn’t exist, they lost in the European court of human rights. MiltenR (talk) 07:00, 18 September 2023 (UTC) Check Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (history). To determine scholarly opinions about a historical topic, consult the following sources in order: 1. Recent scholarly books and chapters on the historiography of the topic; 2. "Review Articles", or historiographical essays that explicitly discuss recent scholarship in an area; 3. Similarly conference papers that were peer reviewed in full before publication that are field reviews or have as their central argument the historiography. You must accept the current scholarly consensus, or the multiple scholarly consensuses held. Views lying outside of these discussions should be considered as non-scholarly opinions and weighted as such. In the case that the views are fringe and that the fringe views are not a central item of historiographical debate, the fringe content should be relegated to its own section as it is the case. Jingiby (talk) 07:46, 18 September 2023 (UTC) Chuvash people I noticed that Artem Petrov CHV uses the same rethoric as the IP vandals, and they're most likely linked to Kamista (etc.). I opened an investigation. Beshogur (talk) 09:33, 19 September 2023 (UTC) Ok. Jingiby (talk) 13:09, 19 September 2023 (UTC) New pages patrol newsletter Hello Jingiby, New Page Review article queue, March to September 2023 Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews! October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here. PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon. Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD. Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge. Reminders: You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord. Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC) what was wrong in my last edit? in my last edit i replaced "the local slavic Macedonian population" with Ethnic Macedonians slarom these vic Macedonians is too ambiguous that's why i changed it to ethnic macedonians Macedonier23 (talk) 13:31, 11 October 2023 (UTC) Hi, Macedonier23. We are talking about the years after the First World War, i.e. 1919-1922, when the province of South Serbia existed. At the time, experts on the Macedonian question, such as Loring Danforth has described the situation of the national identification of the locals in today's North Macedonia as follows: At the end of the World War I there were very few historians or ethnographers, who claimed that a separate Macedonian nation existed. It seems most likely that at this time most of the Slavs of Macedonia, especially those in rural areas, had not yet developed a firm sense of national identity at all... Significantly, there is no positive statement of what they do want to be, no assertion of any nationality that they do identify with. Of those Slavs who had developed some sense of national identity the majority probably considered themselves to be Bulgarians, although, as R. King points out, they were aware of differences between themselves and the inhabitants of Bulgaria. Keep in mind that Macedonian had several meanings then: check here, and they were different from these used now: check here. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2023 (UTC) Favour Two of the sources for the Kostur dialect have been uploaded to Academia.edu. Would you be able to add the links correctly to the Kostur dialect, if I emailed you the links? Thanks in advance. Drenowe (talk) 22:29, 17 October 2023 (UTC) Ok. Jingiby (talk) 03:34, 18 October 2023 (UTC) https://www.academia.edu/93598273/%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BD_%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D1%82_%D0%BE%D1%82_%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%BE_%D0%92%D1%8A%D0%BC%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BB_%D0%9A%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%83%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE_%D0%A1%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE_%D0%B7%D0%B0_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BE_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%B1%D1%8A%D0%BB%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B5_%D0%B2_%D1%8E%D0%B6%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%9C%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B7_%D0%BF%D1%8A%D1%80%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0_%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BD%D0%B0_XX_%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BA https://www.academia.edu/108278418/%D0%9B%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8_%D0%9B%D0%B0%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%BE_%D0%9A%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2_%D0%94%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0_%D1%81_%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D1%81%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%BE%D1%82_%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0_%D0%93%D0%B0%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%88_%D0%B8_%D0%94%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8_ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drenowe (talk • contribs) 11:17, 18 October 2023 (UTC) Hello Drenowe. Sorry, but please suggest that you have provided links to two titles, but the texts of the two articles related to them are not available. The last inscription appears instead: Sorry, this document isn't available for viewing at this time. Jingiby (talk) 16:01, 19 October 2023 (UTC) Sorry, I am not very tech savvy. When I go to the links, it says "Download pdf", and that is the way you access the article. Drenowe (talk) 17:17, 19 October 2023 (UTC) Yes, but the link then is not accessible for the other readers. Jingiby (talk) 17:22, 19 October 2023 (UTC) OK, thanks for the explanation. Drenowe (talk) Drenowe (talk) 17:49, 19 October 2023 (UTC) November Articles for creation backlog drive Hello Jingiby: WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive! The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023. You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful. Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive. There is a backlog of over 2600 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC) Bulgaria vital statistics reversion You have reverted an edit that was based on calculating a decline in percentage term. However, if you calculate those declines the numbers back up my previous edit. For example, a decrease from 85,288 to 64,016 is a decline of 1- 64,016/85,288=0.2494=24.94%. Your calculation of 85,288/64,016 is incorrect because calculations for a percentage change always put the old value in the denominator and the new value in the numerator and not the other way around. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.225.143.94 (talk) 13:58, 18 November 2023 (UTC) Ok. I am going to revert myself. Jingiby (talk) 14:22, 18 November 2023 (UTC) ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC) New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here. You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC) I have sent you a note about a page you started Hello, Jingiby. Thank you for your work on Appeal to the Macedonians in Bulgaria. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments: Hello my friend! Good day to you. Thanks for creating the article, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a blessed day! To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.) ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 12:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC) Hi, User:SunDawn. Thank you for the above comment. Have a nice day. Jingiby (talk) 12:10, 11 January 2024 (UTC) Quoting Borza's Essay "Macedonian Redux" in a fair and balanced manner Hi Jingiby, I'm writing this in hopes of avoiding a potential edit war regarding Borza's essay "Macedonian Redux." The original article quoted this essay very partially and selectively in a manner that distorted and misrepresented Borza's overall views and thesis as expressed in the aforementioned essay. In order to avoid potential for political bias, I deleted the cherry-picked portion or else the entire Wikipedia article risks unnecessary information overload as a result of competing analyses of the essay. However, if you are not content with simply avoiding cherry-picked references and avoiding any reference altogether, then we should expand that section within the Wikipedia article to reflect a more balanced and comprehensive analysis of "Macedonian Redux." In an earlier part of the essay, Borza raises the question, "Which modern state has the most legitimate claim to the territory of the ancient Macedonian kingdom?" to which Borza's answer is: "All and none." In the geographical sense, Macedonia, Greece, and Bulgaria all have rightful claims. Borza then goes on to make the point that on the basis of ethnicity, no party in this geopolitical dispute can make a rightful claim to the heritage of ancient Macedonia. He writes the following: "If the claim is based on ethnicity, it is an issue of a different order. Modern Slavs, both Bulgarians and Macedonians, cannot establish a link with antiquity, as the Slavs entered the Balkans centuries after the demise of the ancient Macedonian kingdom. Only the most radical Slavic factions—mostly émigrés in the United States, Canada, and Australia—even attempt to establish a connection to antiquity. For contemporaty Greeks, however, it is a different matter, as it is an article of faith among most of them that the Ancient Macedonians were Greek, and that noone but modern Greeks may claim right to the name and culture of the Ancient Macedonians. 17 No matter that genetic purity in the Balkans is a fantasy, or that there is no such thing as a cultural continuity in the Macedonian region from antiquity to the present. Politics in the Balkans transcends historical and biological truths. [p 255]" This purpose of the Wikipedia article is to represent Borza's views and not litigate the question of whether or not Macedonia, Greece, or Bulgaria have valid claims to the heritage of ancient Macedonia. The quote that you restored gives the misleading impression that Borza considered that it is exclusively the modern political state of Macedonia that does not have an ethnic link to the ancient Macedonians and that Greece, by implication, has a valid ethnic link, which is not Borza's view. Additionally, Borza recounts an anecdote of him taking a flight to Athens to illustrate the "forceful" propaganda campaign undertaken by the Greek government to maintain "anti-Macedonian sentiments." He quotes the Greek motto "Macedonia is one and only and it is Greek" and then comments on this ironically as follows: "despite the fact that for most of the 2,600 years since the genesis of the ancient Macedonian kingdom ethnic Greeks have been a minority of the population. The overwhelming Hellenic impact on Greek Macedonia is largely the result of the settlements and population exchanges of the early 1920s. Even Thessaloniki, with its rich Byzantine architectural heritage, counted far fewer Greeks than either Sephardic Jews or Turks until after the Balkan Wars of 1912-13." As we see here, Borza reinforces the point that modern Greece does not have an ethnic claim to ancient Macedonia by virtue of the fact that ethnic Greeks were a minority of the population for most of Macedonia's existence and that the only reason ethnic Greeks constitute a majority today is the population exchanges and settlements that occurred in the aftermath of the Balkan Wars and World War 1. That said, if you really insist on quoting "Macedonian Redux" as part of the Wikipedia page, then I propose we do it in a manner that accurately reflects Borza's original intent and message. Thank you 87.116.161.241 (talk) 17:10, 17 January 2024 (UTC) Hi. Then why do you choose to delete the author's view of the Slavic-speaking inhabitants of North Macedonia, but not that of today's Greeks. I think there is a certain one-sidedness and lack of neutrality in your comments. Please comment on the question on the article's talk page so that other editors can join the discussion. I have read the article and my opinion is that for the sake of balance the text should remain as it is. Greetings. Jingiby (talk) 17:17, 17 January 2024 (UTC) I think you misunderstood my message. My point was that we should avoid quoting the essay until such time as we can achieve a well-balanced analysis. Since you want to proceed by referencing the essay, then we will do it a more fair-minded manner. You can include the original quote but then we'll have to add additional quotes and references to contextualize the portion that you want restored. Thank you 87.116.161.241 (talk) 17:29, 17 January 2024 (UTC) I do not agree at all to flood the article with unnecessary details. At the moment, there is one short, precise and clear sentence on the controversial issue, and that is quite enough. Jingiby (talk) 17:46, 17 January 2024 (UTC) Please don't distort my meaning. I didn't say anything about "flood the article." What constitutes "unnecessary details" is a matter of opinion. And to say that quoting that "short, precise and clear sentence" is "quite enough" is a matter of opinion. 87.116.161.241 (talk) 18:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for January 19 An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited Mara Buneva, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page South Serbia. (Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:52, 19 January 2024 (UTC) Talk page discussion opened at Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878) article, per your request I am awaiting your reply there. LoneWolf803 (talk) 07:48, 25 January 2024 (UTC) Lengthy and detailed reply posted in Talk:Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878) the “400,000 civilians” section. Please read it. Posted in the section (I assume) you wanted me to. Please view it. LoneWolf803 (talk) 08:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC) Sources Hi Jingiby, I have The Balkans book by Mark Mazower and Volume 1 to 4 of Stefan Tsanev's Bulgarian Chronicles if you want me to scan the books and send you to them to use as sources. Let me know if you don't have access to any of those books. Perhaps87 (talk) 21:56, 24 January 2024 (UTC) Hi, Perhaps87 and thank you for this proposal. The book Bulgarian Chronicles is not a reliable source per Wikipedia standards, because its author is not an Academician, and it was not published by an University publishing house. As for the book of Mazover, its content is available here, for example. Greetings. Jingiby (talk) 04:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC) Okay its no problem. I have other books and sources. Take a look and let me know which ones you want. ISBN: 9780367808761 9780745315898 9781782380412 9780812245226 9781784533380 9783030391898 1-84964-080-7 9781438141640 9781483371580 DOI: 10.1353/jod.2018.0033 10.5937/univmis2120105K 10.17645/pag.v6i3.1415 --Perhaps87 (talk) 09:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC) Hi, again. Thank you very much. However I think that search engines such as Google Books and Google Scholar provide equivalent possibility to use them online. Jingiby (talk) 12:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC) Expanding section related to Borza's views on the ethnogenesis of modern Macedonians Regarding your recent reversion of an edit that I've made, I've submitted my proposal in the Talk page and explained my rationale. Please consult the Talk page. Thank you Historybuff4life4health (talk) 19:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC) Question When was the Cyrillic alphabet referred as Azbuka in Bulgaria. The sentence that you reverted makes no sense and generally should be removed. It is definitely an improvement and I want a good argument. SaltyViking (talk) 13:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC) Hi SaltyViking, in Bulgarian the terms Българска азбука (Bulgarian script) and Кирилица (Cyrillic script) are synonyms. Aren't they? Also check here: Azbuka. Jingiby (talk) 13:25, 3 February 2024 (UTC) The disputed sentence says: “the Cyrillic alphabet is also known as azbuka”. No, it is not interchangeable. The definition of alphabet is “set of letters or symbols in a fixed order used to represent the basic set of speech sounds of a language, especially the set of letters from A to Z.“. While of cyrilic is “denoting the alphabet used by many Slavic peoples, chiefly those with a historical allegianceto the Orthodox Church. Ultimately derived from Greek uncials, it is now used for Russian, Bulgarian, Serbian, Ukrainian, and some other Slavic languages.”. Therefore, the correct rephrasing of the upper sentce would be: The translation of the English word alphabet in all Slavic languages is ‘azbuka’. Then it can be explained that in CZ and Slovakia the term azbuka and Cyrillic alphabet is interchangeable. In conclusion, the phrasing of the sentence is incorrect. SaltyViking (talk) 16:15, 3 February 2024 (UTC) Ok. Jingiby (talk) 16:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for February 27 An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Samuil's Inscription, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yordan Ivanov. (Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC) Question Hey Jingiby, hope you and yours are safe and doing well. I have a question. I saw this edit by Serbian1331 stating Vukasin was never captured in 1369. The sentence(s) in question: "Vukašin had claimed it as the co-ruler of Stefan Uroš V, whereas Andrea II claimed it on the grounds that the border between Albania and Bulgaria lied at the Pelister mountain, specifically the Dobrida spring. Vukašin gathered an army and marched towards Muzaka's territory, prompting Andrea to gather an army of his own and confront the king at Pelister in 1369. The battle at Pelister ended with the victory of Andrea II, and Vukašin himself was taken prisoner." Which is supported by the reference; "Vukashin was the king of Bulgaria who ruled land almost all the way to Adrianople and who was always among the great enemies of the emperor of Constantinople." "The king had made ready a great army and had arrived to attack Epirus, which was under the rule and reign of the aformentioned Lord Andrew...[..]..They met at a place called Mount Peristeri where there is a spring called Dobrida which is the border between Albania and Bulgaria. And as the day dawned, the said king was vanquished in those cliffs. He was taken prisoner, as was a son of his called Duslandi."-- Robert Elsie, Early Albania: A Reader of Historical Texts; 11th-17th centuries, page 41. Is Vukašin, Vukašin of Serbia? Or is there some other Vukašin? --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC) Hi Kansas Bear, I'm not aware that there was another Vukashin ruler.Jingiby (talk) 08:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC) References Bulgarian Cyrillic Fonts Aloha, Jingiby, are you aware of any Bulgarian Cyrillic language templates? (I mean these thingy like шрифт but using Bulgarian Cyrillic?) The general template is awful, and I certainly have objections to using either Russian or Serbian Cyrillic fonts. I don't find anything, but you are an ol' dog, perhaps you know something I don't. Thanks in advance. VMORO 11:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC) Hi VMORO, sorry but I am not aware with this matter. Jingiby (talk) 17:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC) Thank you. VMORO 23:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC) Question Hey Jingiby, hope you and yours are safe and doing well. I have a question. I saw this edit by Serbian1331 stating Vukasin was never captured in 1369. The sentence(s) in question: "Vukašin had claimed it as the co-ruler of Stefan Uroš V, whereas Andrea II claimed it on the grounds that the border between Albania and Bulgaria lied at the Pelister mountain, specifically the Dobrida spring. Vukašin gathered an army and marched towards Muzaka's territory, prompting Andrea to gather an army of his own and confront the king at Pelister in 1369. The battle at Pelister ended with the victory of Andrea II, and Vukašin himself was taken prisoner." Which is supported by the reference; "Vukashin was the king of Bulgaria who ruled land almost all the way to Adrianople and who was always among the great enemies of the emperor of Constantinople." "The king had made ready a great army and had arrived to attack Epirus, which was under the rule and reign of the aformentioned Lord Andrew...[..]..They met at a place called Mount Peristeri where there is a spring called Dobrida which is the border between Albania and Bulgaria. And as the day dawned, the said king was vanquished in those cliffs. He was taken prisoner, as was a son of his called Duslandi."-- Robert Elsie, Early Albania: A Reader of Historical Texts; 11th-17th centuries, page 41. Is Vukašin, Vukašin of Serbia? Or is there some other Vukašin? --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC) Hi Kansas Bear, I'm not aware that there was another Vukashin ruler.Jingiby (talk) 08:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC) References Bulgarian Cyrillic Fonts Aloha, Jingiby, are you aware of any Bulgarian Cyrillic language templates? (I mean these thingy like шрифт but using Bulgarian Cyrillic?) The general template is awful, and I certainly have objections to using either Russian or Serbian Cyrillic fonts. I don't find anything, but you are an ol' dog, perhaps you know something I don't. Thanks in advance. VMORO 11:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC) Hi VMORO, sorry but I am not aware with this matter. Jingiby (talk) 17:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC) Thank you. VMORO 23:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC) Nomination of Proposed coat of arms of North Macedonia for deletion A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Proposed coat of arms of North Macedonia, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted. The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Proposed coat of arms of North Macedonia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC) New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024 Hello Jingiby, New Page Review queue January to March 2024 Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points. Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive. Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion. It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated! 2023 Awards Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing! WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits. Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited. Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool. Reminders: You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord. Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC) [Fan Mail] I appreciate your efforts in the compiling of historical documentation. Thanks, have a good one. 104.174.90.117 (talk) 08:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC) Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 10:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC) New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here. You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)