Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:05, 6 October 2011

Greece Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1 (2006—2007) Archive 2 (2008)

Irrational emphasis - greatly shorten?

Why is it that, of all the countries in Europe, only 2 have "minorities" pages (Greece and Poland)? What is even crazier, is that these 2 are the only ones with no sizable minorities to speak of!! Both Poland and Greece have less than 2% minority populations, while in most European countries the percentage is above 5%, and often much more. Until the other pages are filled up comparably, I would propose greatly trimming the article to include only real minorities (i.e. minorities whose people accept the minority identity). Causantin (talk) 11:56, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Please take a look at Category:Ethnic groups in Europe by country, which points to category pages for ethnic groups in all European counties (who knew there were Portuguese Luxembourgers? You will find that ethnic groups/minorities in Europe are actually quite well covered. Anyway, even if it were true that this article was more complete than the corresponding articles on other countries, that would not be a reason to "trim" this one, but to improve the others.

A better name for this article would probably be 'Ethnic groups in Greece', but in articles about Greece, it is probably better to avoid the word 'ethnic', since 'national' and 'ethnic' are the same word (εθνικὀς) in Greek. --macrakis (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

4milion arvanites origin 2milion speaks albanian 1milion slaves origin 300000speaks macedonian 100000 turk 1milion vlach origin 200000speaks vlaks 20000speaks albanian chams or 1milion greeks autocton 3milion from anadoll 6milion asimilated greeks and minorities when 3milion didnt speak greek from 300000 in epirus only 50000are pure greeks and 200000didnt speak greek from 2milion in macedonia 300000are pure greeks 1milion from anadoll 3ooooo are asimilated and 400000 are albanians vlach and slavs in central greece from 4milion 2milion are arvanites and 1milion speak today arvanites in thrace 300000people where 150000 muslim, 50000arvanites, 500000bulgares and 50000greeks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shqiptari77 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Discrimination of turks

"Turks in Greece suffer from discrimination according to Human Rights Watch. On on 29 January 1990 Komotini events Turks become the target of Greek nationalists." I cant see any pov it verified and some people remove sentence even without looking/checking references.--Abbatai (talk) 08:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Wrong Albanian numbers- READ THE SOURCE

The source says the number of Albanian immigrants in Greece is 459,390. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bronxguy (talk • contribs) 19:41, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Lunch for Two (talk) 13:58, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Changes to "Macedonian speaking" and "Pomak" sections.

Users who disagree with the edits made to the former "Slavic-speakers" section, please present your reasons for this belief. All of the changes were well sourced and reflect both POV's (namely people who identify as ethnic Macedonians and people who identify as Greeks Slavophone Greeks). It reflects that although there are people who identify as Greeks, there are others however who identify as Macedonians and the references show the steps which these people have taken to nurture their mother language.

Similarly, the edits to the Pomak section simply reflect the linguistic classification of this speech, and provide information regarding the steps that these people have taken to foster their own culture. Lunch for Two (talk) 06:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Look, you need valid neutral reliable sources. Youtube is not among them. Neither is 'http://www.australianmacedonianweekly.com'. Moreover, you have changed the heading Slavic-speaking to Macedonian-speaking which is plain wrong since the section itself is about other groups as well (apart from the alleged Macedonian-speakers). Not to mention most additions are extremely POVish and sources are used selectively. I asked you to discuss the issues before adding the info that could spark an edit-war. Thanks for the cooperation, really. --Laveol 06:20, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the first part of your comment. (The Youtube source was only used for the Pomak news segment, I dont enough of the Greek script to be able to do full searches for the information, I am hopeful that this can be assisted by some of the Greek speaking users here).

It is clear that the language is Macedonian (this has been established time and time again by linguists, and by self identification of many of the speakers). In recent years the movement to promote the use of this language has been gaining momentum (in Greece), and this should be reflected in the text of the article. Literature (ie books, etc.) will need time (as always), to catch up with recent developments, and at this stage newspaper articles merely describing facts are suitable for sources. It is a fact that Macedonian language newspapers, radio stations, courses for learning the language, Macedonian-speaking mayors, etc. exist. How do you suggest that, apart from newspaper articles, that this information is sourced.

I detached the Pomak minority, given that they are a completely different group and share very little in common with the Macedonian speakers in Florina, Kastoria, etc.Lunch for Two (talk) 06:36, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Third Party here. Lunch for Two asked me to chime in. I'm not sure that I've changed half a dozen Balkan related pages out of my 12,000 edits. :) First of all, the amount of text added and reverted is *very* large and covers a wide variety of topics. Preferably, they should be added back in from least to most controversial with time to consider.

• The section with "further Albanian" is not referenced at all, and "interestingly" IMO, never belongs in wikipedia outside a quote
• The section with "Megleno-Romanian speakers" appears to reflect what is in that article, but adding a reference from that article with what is this article would be useful.
• The Pomaks, I don't think the title needs to be changed, "however there have been reports" isn't appropriate and the youtube video doesn't indicate that it has been broadcast. The census piece, OTOH, is probably appropriate.
• For the remainder Macedonia/Slavic speaking, given that the article referenced as Main is "Slavic-speakers of Greek Macedonia", I think the title prior to Lunch for Two's changes shold stay. My concern is less for the references, which for the ones with the mk seem to simply indicate they exist and more for balance among the various paragraphs. A large amount of what is added appears to already been in Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia, so what is actually in this article should probably be no longer than the text for the Roma or the Turks.
• I think that an additional level of title may be appropriate: Have the Slavic speakers as a title at one level with perhaps an intro paragraph and have the Macedonians and Pomaks as titles at the next level down.Naraht (talk) 15:34, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Fair comments being made. I think another subheading at the same level at the Pomak subheading called "Ethnic Macedonians" is a suitable compromise. Here the information about the ethnic Macedonian minority can be added (which in itself is quite extensive), whilst still retaining information about the speakers who choose to identify as Greeks (which was contained in my original edit)

As for the other sections, I will invest more time in better wording/references. Lunch for Two (talk) 12:42, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

After having a look at the page again, maybe it is more appropriate if "Ethnic Macedonians in Greece" is placed under the heading 'Other minorities', given that they are an ethnic minority (comparable to the turks, armenians and jews) and not merely a cultural-linguistic one (which implies Greek national consciousness). Any comments making such an edit? Lunch for Two (talk) 15:39, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

No, because most Slavic-speakers in Greek Macedonia identify as Greek. Only a small minority identify as "ethnic Macedonian" (as evidenced by the poor performance of "Rainbow"). Athenean (talk) 15:00, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

That is your opinion. Here are some facts:

• There exist people in Greece who identify as ethnic Macedonians
• These people are represented by several organisations
• These people have suceeded in electing ethnic Macedonians to public office
• There exist several Macedonian newspapers in Greece
• There are Macedonian language radio programs in Greece
• There have been calls for the introduction of the Macedonian language in schools
• Several Macedonian language courses in several cities have been set up. (All of these above facts were substantiated by links on the version which I edited)

Now Athenean, where do you propose that this minority receives coverage on this page? (All of this evidence strongly reaffirms that as a group, they exist) Lunch for Two (talk) 15:39, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Most of this people, probably 95% have a Greek selfidentification and speak different Slavic dialects. Please, keep neutraliry. Jingby (talk) 16:49, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, this is an unsubstantiated and clearly biased POV statement, and secondly, it does not nothing to counter the information which has been presented that clearly shows there is a significant population identifying as Macedonians (ethnically).

Is it not neutral to present the fact these people exist? And that they have manifested ways of expressing their identity (newspapers, radio, schools, organisations, etc.). Let the reader make up their own mind, judging from what these people have done themselves, as to whether or not they exist.

In spite of all of the information presented from intellectuals, and all of the evidence of self-identification by native Macedonian, is there anyone who can present a reason why this minority should not be listed on this page? (The fact that some speakers may have a different ethnic consciousness, is not a restricting reason) Lunch for Two (talk) 09:00, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Secondly, provide your reliable, nonbiased, scientific sources, not your POV. Thank you. Jingby (talk) 09:34, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:NEWSORG; "Mainstream news reporting is generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact". My edit contained only facts which reflected real-life occurances in Northern Greece. Understandably, the limited interest which the English-language media has in regards to minority groups in Greece, is reflected in the lack of many recent English language articles also reflecting the occurances. The occurances may have been picked up in the Greek press, I personally do not know enough Greek to see if this is the case. The Macedonian language newspaper articles, for these purposes are acceptable as sources as per WP:NEWSORG.

Stop reverting edits due to personal POV, and rather assess the actual facts to see if they can be substantiated or not. Which of the instances of Macedonian self-identification did not occur?. Lunch for Two (talk) 10:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

• I have divided the section now information can be put about those identifying as Greeks and those who do not. Both POV's are covered. Lunch for Two (talk) 12:50, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

The name of this article is Minorities in Greece. Please, create a different article about this 10,000 people and do not manipulate this one, which was neutral before your mass-edits. Thank you. Jingby (talk) 13:18, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Since when does size have anything to do with it? Why will you not accept the edits? Do these people not exist?! Lunch for Two (talk) 13:29, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Because nobody cares about newspapers from the WWII. Jingby (talk) 13:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

No, but people might be interested in the 6 Macedonian newspapers published in the last 20 years. Or the radio programs. Or the language classes. Or just self-identification in general.Lunch for Two (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, because of that you have created a new article. Congratulations. Jingby (talk) 14:42, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

They might also be interested in the fact that "Rainbow" hasn't run for elections since 2007, but you're probably not too crazy about mentioning that, are you? Athenean (talk) 14:44, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I dont mind having that in the article, so long as the other information regarding their self identification (elected representatives, radio, newspapers, etc.) are also mentioned. Lunch for Two (talk) 02:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

POV-pushing

I have reverted these edits as POV-pushing. First, the very use of language such as "among the problems of the muslim minority" and "another problem" are editorializing in nature, partisan, and unencyclopedic. Second, this so-called "Greek state's discimination" is from a source that's over 20 years old, and the situation has changed considerably since then. Third, mention of every single cemetery desecration is well beyond the scope of the article. This article is intended to provide readers with an overview of the minorities in Greece, not a litany of abuse and complaints. The section on Turks should be no longer or that different from the others. Lastly, the Turks of Western Thrace are listed in the Religious Minorities section together with the Pomaks because that is how they are treated in the Treaty of Lausanne, and therefore the Greek state, and most importantly the literature. I am well aware of the Gökalpian pan-Turkist POV, but it has no place in the article. Athenean (talk) 02:02, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Athanean;

1) If writing "among the problems" is "editorializing" you could have rephrased it instead of deleting the information altogether with its source. That would be much more constructive, what you did is damaging the encyclopedia. While I may-will try to do this myself, I do not totally understand what you are criticising. The source itself says muslims of Athens criticized and protested the absense of a mosque. So, why this does not qualify as a minority problem? Anyway, it is easy to find many sources that describe the current situation as a "problem", take for example the BBC: "...though the city authorities, aware of the problem..." (ie, the problem of the lack of an official mosque in Athens)
2) With regard to the "discrimination" paragraph, are you aware that you have also deleted a source published in 2011 and speaking about a 2009 event? (ie, Thrace Court of Appeal's decision about Xanti Turkish Union's appeal) This proves that there is consistency in Greek state's minority policy since 1980's. That means, what that "20 year old" source (Whitman, 1990) writes is still valid. However, it is better to keep it, too, since it mentions the historical root of the current situation. Besides, you have also deleted a 2003 source, too, as part of the same paragraph. You have also deleted another source from 1999, that of UN Refugee Agency's report. All those point to severe problems of this minority, both historical and contemporarly.
3) About "mentioning every single cemetary", I understand your concern about this article being more of a summary so I summarized the recent attacks. However, upon your request, I will make it an even more of a summary. About other minorities, if they, too, are subjected such frequent atrocities, those should be mentioned, too (rather than deleting the information about Turkish minority, we should complete the lacking information for others)
4) I do not think any of us would object that "Turkish" is an ethnic group like "Albanian" and not a religious one. Therefore the Turkish minority in Greece should be classified like Albanian or Armenian minorities, no matter if they are recognized as such in a treaty or not. We in Misplaced Pages are not required to organize our articles according to treaties.
5) The new paragraph you introduced instead of the one you delete contains Alexandris as the single source. However, I can not find the information you wrote in the page you indicate (page 120) of that book. In any case, Alexandris is not a reliable source about minority issues, he is very political and at times gives false information. (eg. in the page you referred, page 120, he says the oldest mosque on Imbros and Tenedos dates from 1965, while this is wrong by order of a few centuries) I suggest you to confirm everything he says from a more reliable source. Please also give more exact page numbers for each information.
Filanca (talk) 21:22, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

There is no Muslim "minority" in Athens, rather the Muslims there are recent immigrants. Hence the "problem" of the mosque in Athens is not a "minority" issue. You are trying to make it one though, and that is fairly obvious. As far as "consistency" and "sever problems of the minority" that is just your own POV and OR. Not interested. Regarding "atrocities", you again need to look up the definition of the word. Cemetery desecrations are not "atrocities", and I don't care how much you summarize it, they are beyond the scope of the article. The mere fact that you keep using the word "atrocities" speaks volumes about your motivation and POV. I've already explained to you why the Turkish minority is listed as a religious minority, if you aren't listening, that's not my problem. Lastly, Alexandris is a very reliable source. The fact that that you think he is "very poltical" says more about your motivation than his. And if you think he is so unreliable, why do you want the page number anyway? The information is all there, it's just a few pages after the Imbros and Tenedos section. I also strongly advise you against canvassing other Turkish users for support, it is a reportable (and blockable) offense. Athenean (talk) 21:51, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

My reply would be:

1) In which way being recent does not make Muslims a minority? And muslims in Athens are not that recent (even when setting aside Ottomans). See for example this source: Greek state considered (but did not build) a mosque in Athens first in 1880. An unofficial mosque was built in 1980. There are an estimated 200,000 muslims living in Athens, 10,000 of those are Greek citizens.

2) Re-adding the paragraph about discrimination since you do not object to that.

3) The minority was subject to frequent attacks in the recent years and that is important -- in one case a mosque was set on fire while 40 people were locked in. I would understand keeping it summarized here but omitting this important situation would be wrong. As for "atorcity", English is not my native language so I may pick up a word that is not appropriate from time to time. I will use "attacks" which sounds like more proper.

4) I understand that you want to classify Turks as a religious minority because of the Treaty of Lausanne which mentions a muslim minority in Greece, not a Turkish one. Again, here in Misplaced Pages we are not bound to organize our articles according to any treaty or government policy. Are Turks an ethnic group? Yes. Are there Turks in Greece? Yes. They have no difference from Albanian or Armenian minority in Greece in terms of being an ethnic minority. We are not in a position to consider all Turkish minority as muslims, they may be atheist or Christian members of the minority. See ethnologue: Languages of Greece (...) Turkish 128,000 in Greece (1976 WA). Thrace and Aegean regions. Alternate names: Osmanli. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Turkish

5) Do you say Alexandris is very reliable even after the example of his giving a faulty date as I indicated above? I am not totally against using him as a source, but given his track record of writing faulty information about Turks, I suggested to confirm what he said from other sources. And since your reference page number to his book is definitely wrong, if you will not correct, I will have to tag it.

6) My canvassing: There is no harm at notifying people who we think may be interested to an issue. The only person I mentioned this discussion is (I guess) interested (and, incidentally, he says he is not Turkish).
Filanca (talk) 21:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

• Start-Class Greek articles
• Mid-importance Greek articles
• WikiProject Greece general articles
• All WikiProject Greece pages