Revision as of 10:03, 6 April 2012 editDPL bot (talk | contribs)Bots668,745 edits dablink notification message (see the FAQ)← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:23, 21 April 2012 edit undoNomoskedasticity (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers21,756 edits Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Bulgaria. (TW)Next edit → | ||
Line 117: | Line 117: | ||
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 10:03, 6 April 2012 (UTC) | It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 10:03, 6 April 2012 (UTC) | ||
== April 2012 == | |||
] Your recent editing history at ] shows that you are currently engaged in an ]. '''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being ]'''—especially if you violate the ], which states that an editor must not perform more than three ] on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. | |||
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's ] to work toward making a version that represents ] among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant ] or seek ]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary ]. <!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ] (]) 19:23, 21 April 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:23, 21 April 2012
Welcome
|
Turks in Bulgaria/Europe
The National Statistical Institute of Bulgaria clearly states the following
- National Statistical Institute of Bulgaria (2011), 2011 Census (Final data) (PDF), National Statistical Institute of Bulgaria, p. 4
Turco85 (Talk) 12:56, 14 March 2012 (UTC)Турската етническа група е втората по численост - 588 318 лица. Те представляват 8.8% от населението.
The Turkish ethnic group is the second largest - 588,318 persons. They represent 8.8% of the population.
You have not understood correctly. It is 8.8% of those that voluntarily declared their ethnic group, not of Bulgaria's population. I am beginning a long clarifying from here- Bulgaria's population is 7,364,570 as of the census see the final data (PDF), p. 3, yet some 680,000 people have not gave any answer at the question for ethnic group and therefore 6,680,980 is the figure from which the percentages of the ethnic groups are taken in the final data: according to the Statistical Institute's ethnic statistics here. 588,318 out of 6,680,980 is 8.81%, while 588,318 out of 7,364,570 is 7.99% (caluclated with percentage calculator, - {{citation}}
: Check date values in: |year=
(help)CS1 maint: year (link)).
The quotation itself starts on this way:
Българската етническа група обхваща 5 664 624, или 84,8% от лицата, доброволно декларирали етническото си самоопределение.
Турската етническа група е втората по численост - 588 318 лица. Те представляват 8.8% от населението.
The Bulgarian ethnic group comprise 5 664 624, or 84,8% from the persons, voluntarily declared their ethnic affiliation.
The Turkish ethnic group is the second largest - 588,318 persons. They represent 8.8% of the population.
and as you see here in the statistics both 84.8 and 8.8 percentages are taken from one figure - not from Bulgaria's population, so as the current statement claims 8.8% from the Bulgaria's population it is misleading.--Ceco31 (talk) 19:07, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- That is not how we do things at wikipedia. We have to stick to what the sources say, not make our own interpretations out of it. The source says 8.8%, unless you can find official sources which states 8% your edit will be reverted.Turco85 (Talk) 22:16, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
- You are misinterpreting the sources - it is from the persons voluntarily declared their ethnic group. It claims "The Bulgarian ethnic group comprise 5 664 624, or 84,8% from the persons, voluntarily declared their ethnic affiliation." and I can prove that both percentages of 84.8% of the Bulgarian ethnic group and 8.8% of the Turkish are from one figure, here proven by the Statistical Institute: here. See now from the source behind, not from my own interpretations, that 8.8% and 84.8%(the percentage of the Bulgarian ethnic group) are percentages from one figure, and remember again what was claimed for 84.8% "from the persons, voluntarily declared their ethnic affiliation". See in it also that the percentages are taken from the total of 6,680,980 and Bulgaria's population was 7,364,570 as of the census. --Ceco31 (talk) 19:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
I am trying to compromise with you, but I don't see why you keep removing my edits when I am merely trying to improve your sentence structure. Your grammer is not the best.Turco85 (Talk) 16:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, I understand the point you are trying to make now. Nonetheless, the sentence still needed a cleanup for clarity.Turco85 (Talk) 16:54, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Romanization of Bulgarian
Hi and thanks for your desire to contribute! Can you please conform to the romanization system officially established in Misplaced Pages? You can make yourself familiar here: Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (Cyrillic)#Bulgarian. The system in question is the official one, as used on identity cards, and you can see it in action here: .
Please note that this is not a discussion about which system is better or worse: I like other systems better than the one you are using or the official one, but we have to be consistent throughout Misplaced Pages. I'd appreciate it if you go through the romanization changes you've made and revert them. Thanks!
Do let me know if you need help with anything else, I'd be happy to assist. Best, — Toдor Boжinov — 08:32, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Todor and thanks for the readiness to assist, I will seek you for help and opinions when I need. I myself will revert the changes I made on romanization if it need be according to the rules of Misplaced Pages. Just confirm shortly once again with "revert them" and I will revert them. Because I first want to ask you, as currently on the pages I made changes it conforms to the official system as on the identity cards by all odds except the emphasis in "a", and wouldn't be better to have the emphasis to distinguish "a" from "ъ" because they are diferent sounds in general and in the Misplaced Pages:IPA for Bulgarian and Macedonian and as this change from "a" to "ă" is not changing of letter of the official system, only adding a stress?--Ceco31 (talk) 09:49, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
- Hi! I realize why you made this change and I am also unhappy with the way the official system fails to distinguish between "а" and "ъ". There's not much we can do about it, though: the system is official and it has been intentionally designed without diacritics. So please revert these changes you have made. Of course, if you want to make sure the readers correctly understand the pronunciations of placenames, etc. (but not of "български" every time), you can always add an IPA pronunciation guide.
- By the way, see here for my arguments as to why the passage you added to Musala should be removed. Best, — Toдor Boжinov — 10:45, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 6
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Kingdom of Bulgaria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Kingdom
- Principality of Bulgaria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Treaty of Berlin
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:03, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
April 2012
Your recent editing history at Bulgaria shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2012 (UTC)