Misplaced Pages

Talk:Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Peace dove with olive branch in its beakPlease stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
Slavic dialects of Greece was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 22 August 2011 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
Articles for deletionThis article was nominated for deletion on May 16, 2008. The result of the discussion was No Consensus.
This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconEthnic groups Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities 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.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

WikiProject iconLanguages Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages 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.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconBulgaria High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Bulgaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bulgaria 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.BulgariaWikipedia:WikiProject BulgariaTemplate:WikiProject BulgariaBulgaria
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconNorth Macedonia High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject North Macedonia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North Macedonia 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.North MacedoniaWikipedia:WikiProject North MacedoniaTemplate:WikiProject North MacedoniaNorth Macedonia
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSerbia Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia 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.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconGreece: Politics High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek people 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
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Politics and politicians task force.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.


Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9
Archive 10Archive 11

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.
Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Previous consensus on not including "Bulgarian" in the list of languages

here is the previous discussion on the matter of including "Bulgarian" in the language infobox that includes extensive linguistic references on the subject. The conclusion was that the vast majority of linguists do not include the Greek dialects in Bulgarian, but entirely in Macedonian. --Taivo (talk) 08:55, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

All of the arguments that you have were made and shown to be insufficient at that time. Please don't drag this up again. It will end at the same place and we will have wasted time saying the very same things that were said two years ago. --Taivo (talk) 09:14, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

May 2021

Hi, without any consensus or discussion on the issue, an attempt is made to unilaterally change the title of this article and to start a biased review of the topic lead itself. This is undesirable and unacceptable. These issues have been discussed many times and raising them again does not mean that anyone can dispose of the article.Jingiby (talk) 11:17, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I added content with reliable sources. Why has it been removed? Unexplained removal of sourced content is unacceptable. This article should reflect the view point of academics and human rights organizations, who recognize the ethnic Macedonian minority in Greece. It’s unacceptable that this article is trying to call them by anything other than their accepted name, and parrot the viewpoint of the government. Veritaes Unam (talk) 13:50, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

This issue is addressed in the topic, but not in the introduction. It is revealed in the relevant section called Past discrimination. This topic is extensive and covers a period of a century, not of several years, which is suggested by such biased changes with which I do not agree. It is clear that this is WP:Undue Weight. Jingiby (talk) 14:05, 5 May 2021 (UTC) 
Given that this article is about the Macedonian minority of Greece, I think there should clearly be a sentence in the lead describing the human rights situation, given that it is encompasses something as serious as denying their existence. It is not in the past, but continues to this day, unless you can provide sources that state otherwise.

You didn’t address the naming issue. All the reliable sources I provided refer to this minority by their name. There is agreement in academic and human rights circles that they speak the Macedonian language, which is even acknowledged in this article itself. There is therefore no reason to not refer to them as “Macedonians.” I find it unacceptable that this article seems to deny their ethnic identity, in agreement with the Greek government. Veritaes Unam (talk) 15:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

What the rticle states at the moment differs sharply from your claims. The text is well sourced: Members of this group have had a number of conflicting ethnic identifications. Predominantly identified as Macedonian Bulgarians until the early 1940s, since the formation of a Macedonian nation state, many of the migrant population in the diaspora (Australia, United States and Canada) now feel a strong Macedonian identity and have followed the consolidation of the Macedonian ethnicity. However, those who remain in Greece now identify themselves mainly as ethnic Greeks. Jingiby (talk) 15:14, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
There is no consensus in academic circles that Macedonian Slavic is even a language, and not a dialect of Bulgarian. What is generally agreed is that South Slavic traditionally forms a dialect continuum, and that Macedonian Slavic and Bulgarian (and occasionally Torlakian) are part of Eastern South Slavic, either being considered different languages within that group, or different dialects of the same language. There is no clear definition of the term "language", and similar issues exist, for example, regarding the categorisation of Galician. Any other more specific claim, without the introduction of a new framework where a clear definition of language is made, is only political. Members of the minority self-identify either as Greeks, Bulgarians, ethnic Macedonians, or simply "Macedonians"/locals in the geographical sense. The current title of the article is the most inclusive one and the one used most often outside Misplaced Pages. The Greek government usually uses the term "Slavic-speaking Greeks", not "Slavic speakers of (Greek) Macedonia". --Antondimak (talk) 16:07, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

The citation used for the claim that they identify as ethnic Greeks clearly states that this minority speaks the Macedonian language, specifically “The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World” in page 116. It refers to the population as speaking Macedonian, and referring to themselves as Macedonians. It also states that many identify as Greek and Macedonian, and that some only identify as Macedonian. Nothing here contradicts the claim that they are Macedonians. So I can add this source to my list of sources. Either way, that they had conflicting ethnic identities decades ago is not very relevant Macedonians right now, who identify as such. If a minority of the group doesn’t identify as Macedonian, this only supports the claims of human rights organizations that the Greek government is attempting to erase their identity. But we ought to call them by their proper name, as stated in all the reliable sources I provided. There is consensus that the language (or dialect, if you wish) they speak is called Macedonian, and even the Greek government has recognized the Macedonian language, while continuing to deny the existence of this minority. Veritaes Unam (talk) 16:27, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Please stop trying to interpret the sources completely contradictory or exactly as it tells you. Many of these people have never felt themselves as ethnic Macedonian. Neither in the past nor today. Jingiby (talk) 16:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
I will add that "Macedonian" doesn't necessarily mean "ethnic Macedonian". Many Greeks identify as Macedonian, while having nothing to do with Macedonian Slavs. The fact that they are plainly called "Macedonians" in Misplaced Pages only intensifies this confusion. --Antondimak (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Jingiby, I am not giving a crazy interpretation of the source, and I don’t want to copy the sentences word by word as I can’t do that on Google Books. But still, you implied that the book “The Macedonian Conflict” contradicted my claim that they are called Macedonian, by saying that it calls them Greek. The reality is that page 116 of the book explicitly says that many identify as both Macedonian and Greek, and that some only identify as Macedonian. In either case, they identify as Macedonian. Please read page 116 of the book, and also all the sources I provided. The claim that many of them have never felt Macedonian is just wrong.

And Antondimak, I don’t know much about ethnic Greek Macedonians, or if that is even a real, distinct Greek group with a distinct culture. If they are, then if you’d like we can distinguish the Macedonians in this article from them by calling them a South Slavic group. Veritaes Unam (talk) 19:09, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

That's the problem you seem to not be well versed in this topic, which is notoriously confusing, with state actors purposefully promoting this confusion in the past. I haven't read the source, but when somebody is said to identify as "both Macedonian and Greek", it most probably means they identify as Macedonians (Greeks). --Antondimak (talk) 21:19, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

I am well versed on the South Slavic ethnic group known as Macedonians. You can tap on the source, which is , and see what he himself says on page 116. He is obviously not talking about Greek Macedonians, he is referring to the minority that speaks the Slavic Macedonian language. He divides this group of Macedonian speakers into two groups: those that identify as both Macedonian and Greek, and those that identify only as Macedonian.

It is, of course, not surprising that minorities will often refer to their nationality as that of the country they live in, like Chinese Uyghurs, African Americans, Azeri Iranians. In any case, this and all the other sources I provided refer to this minority by their proper name: Macedonian. And as I said, if you wish to distinguish them from the ethnic Greek Macedonians, we can simply refer to them as South Slavic in the article. Is this agreeable to you? Veritaes Unam (talk) 21:48, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Everything important and basic on the topic has already been written. Attempts to interpret it in a new way, after 15 years of discussing and reaching a compromise, are simply provocative and one-sided. The lack of balance and neutrality by this attempt is obvious. I strongly oppose its next politicization. Jingiby (talk) 02:49, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Page 116 of source 96 isn't available to me (the preview only goes up to 90). Regardless, as I said there are four identities in the region, Bulgarian, Greek, ethnic/Slavic Macedonian, local Macedonian/dopia. The name you are proposing, either with the explanation or not, isn't inclusive enough, not now and especially not for the whole history of the region, which the article describes (in the past there was even a not insignificant Serbian identity). --Antondimak (talk) 08:10, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Antondimak, you can try to check the content from here. You will see that our statements are much closer to the opinion of the author, than the claims of the editor who is trying to change the title of this article. Jingiby (talk) 08:25, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Dear Wiki Users, I admire your thorough research and ardent contributiion. But beware - be objective and keep the encyclopedism of Misplaced Pages. There are no correct readings of historical events, we shall try to present all points of view and let the reader decide especially today when general speaking is outdated. I propose that this Talk: page shall be summarized and added to the article itself as it also shows effective points of view of empathetic people and is valuable to tracking data change. Best regards,Litev (talk) 10:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Jingiby, a compromise cannot deny a minority its recognized name and existence. There is no lack of balance my friend. You seem to be hostile to this, but I provided numerous sources, which I encourage you to consider!

Antondimak, you say there are four identities, and that this therefore isn’t “inclusive enough.” But why should it be inclusive to people who don’t identify as Slavic Macedonian? Obviously, this group isn’t inclusive to ethnic Greeks, Serbians, or Bulgarians, who are different ethnic groups. This group speaks, as the article says, a language that is known as Macedonian everywhere else. I’ll quote the book mentioned before: “Of the 53,000 inhabitants of the district of Florina, 65 percent according to one Greek estimate, refer to themselves as ‘locals,’ or ‘local Macedonians.’ In addition to Greek, most of these local Macedonians speak Macedonian.” It goes on the say that they identify as Macedonian, and if you keep reading the next few pages, it describes the efforts of local Macedonian human rights activists in raising awareness for the Macedonian minority and getting recognition from the Greek government. Given that there obviously, indisputably is a self-identified Macedonian minority that speaks Slavic Macedonian, which is backed by various sources, we must call them as such in this article, and reserve a sentence in the lead about human rights concerns, since that is a big issue that continues to this day.

And Litev, thanks for your input! I agree with you that the view of them and the Greek government should also be mentioned in the article. Veritaes Unam (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

What the source say is something different and is as follows: The majority of these local Macedonians have been fully Hellenized and have a Greek national identity. They say that they are Macedonians and Greeks, they are Greek Macedonians. Moreover this article clearly and simply states: "Slavic speakers" or "Slavophones" is also used as a cover term for people across the different ethnic orientations. The exact number of the linguistic minority remaining in Greece today, together with its members' choice of ethnic identification, is difficult to ascertain; most maximum estimates range around 180,000-200,000 with those of an ethnic Macedonian national consciousness numbering possibly 10,000 to 30,000. However, as per leading experts on this issue, the number of this people has decreased in the last decades, because of intermarriage and urbanization; they now number between 50,000 and 70,000 people with around 10,000 of them identifying as ethnic Macedonians. In this situation, trying to push the idea that these people are mostly ethnic Macedonians is, to say it mildly, incorrect. It is obvious that 80-90% of these people are Greek conscious. The term Macedonian also means Greeks, Bulgarians, Vlachs, etc. All of these meanings are older then ethnic Macedonian, which gained poularity after WWII. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 02:57, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Just adding from another source. On page 142 in Clogg (ed.) Minorities in Greece (2002) , it says Today, most of the school children no longer speak Slavic, and the vast majority of the Slavic-speaking (and formerly Slavic-speaking) population identify themselves with the Greek national collectivity. --T*U (talk) 12:01, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
I might be redundant at this point but I'd add that I also find any attempt to move the page to "Macedonian minority/people/etc" -- anything that implies a Macedonian identity on the model of the state identity of North Macedonia as applied to all recently Slavic descended individuals in the region -- to be problematic. "Slavic speakers" is problematic too but it's the least awful option presented thus far. --Calthinus (talk) 22:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Jingiby, you have not contradicted anything I said by quoting the book. In other words, these Slavic Macedonians also identify as Greek. Yet, they are STILL Macedonians. The author clearly states that this group of Slavic Macedonians is divided into those that identify as both Greek and Macedonian and those that only identify as Macedonian. Either way, there is undeniably a self-identified Macedonian minority in Greece.

It’s funny that you quote Misplaced Pages, but Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source. Have you looked at the sources? To quote from source , “Greece denies the existence of a Macedonian minority within its border, despite evidence that there is a small number, perhaps 50,000, whose linguistic and cultural aspirations are repressed.” Dawisha, Karen; Parrott, Bruce (1997). Politics, power, and the struggle for democracy in South-East Europe. Cambridge University Press. pp. 268

Another reason Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source, because what is written is often contradicted by its own sources.

As my sources and these additional ones above show, there is an ethnic Macedonian minority in Greece. Their existence cannot be reasonably denied, and every given source given by you and I support this.

And I’ll repeat once more: identifying as Greek does not mean that they can’t be ethnic Slavic Macedonians. As “The Macedonian Conflict” states, they identify as both, and some only as Macedonian. Veritaes Unam (talk) 09:54, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I do not understand any of this nonsense.Jingiby (talk)
I am afraid I have to agree with Jingiby, Antondimak, Calthinus and T*U here. The sources confirm that there is not 1 group but multiple ones. I also do believe that the current article title is the most inclusive and allows for all the groups to be covered. I am against changing the article title unilaterally like that, especially when the current article title is achieved 1) through debate, 2) by taking in account all the varying sources on the matter, 3) and with WP:CONSENSUS. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ 11:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

I've never understood why this article isn't split into "Bulgarians in Greece", "Ethnic Macedonians in Greece", and "Slavophone Greeks". All three groups exist and are certainly notable enough for standalone articles. The systemic discrimination against Slavs in Macedonia by the Greek government has muddied the situation to where I sort of understand why we handle all three in one article, though I do not find it to be the ideal way to present these groups. --Local hero 16:47, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

There was a Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment on the issue. The question was: Should the article "Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia" be turned into a disambiguation page containing the following new articles?: 1. Macedonians in Greece; 2. Bulgarians in Greece; 3. Slavophone Greeks. The answer was: No! Jingiby (talk) 17:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
I'm aware there have been discussions in the past. The only argument I see there in favor of the current situation is a supposed content forking if we were to split. The very intro sentence of this article states that the people covered in this article are a linguistic group. What about in the ethnic sense? The lead does not even mention ethnicity at all. --Local hero 17:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
This can be fixed by mentioning all the groups on the lead. It is a must. How else readers are supposed to know what the rest of the article is about? --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ 23:34, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@SilentResident, Local hero, Jingiby, and TU-nor: To be honest, if this discussion has done any good, it is elucidating the difficulties with this page's scope. I think in the future we should consider a split. Here's a few things to consider.
  1. . As TU-nor noted, many ethnic descendants of Slavic speakers do not speak any Slavic idiom whatsoever. Are they in scope, or not?
  2. . The page seems to include the descendants of Bulgarian and Macedonian nationals whose ancestors lived in the area? What about Turkish nationals with the same origins? Yes there are these too. The infobox lists them, as well as the analogous cases in Australia and other Western countries. If we go by the infobox's numbers, the diaspora outnumbers those in the homeland. Many of these speak neither Greek nor Macedonian (if we can call the dialects of Aegean Macedonia "Macedonian", a statement with no positive or negative support in linguistics, only in politics).
  3. . Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia includes migrants into the region and their descendants. There are Bulgarian and to a lesser extent Macedonian immigrants especially in Thessaloniki . Are their children in the scope of the page?
  4. . The page excludes the Slavic speakers of West Thrace, but this seems POV -- namely, it reflects a view that subtly asserts that the Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia are Macedonian-like while those of West Thrace are Bulgarian-like or some separate group, Pomaks, since a large percent are Muslim (however, there were once many Muslim Slavs in Greek Macedonia too -- their descendants live in Turkey). This is a valid viewpoint, but it is not the only one. It is POV.
  5. . Are we asserting that Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia constitute a single group? This seems dubious. Take the analogous case of Southeast Slavic speakers in Albania -- they are not a single group. The Gorani are different from the Gollobordas who are in turn quite different from the Slavs of Mala Prespa, to say little of the smaller but also quite distinct (if now vanishing) communities near Lin, in Boboshtica, in Vernik, and near Maqellare/Makelari. While the Slavs of Mala Prespa homogenously identify as Macedonian and those of nearby Vernik are mostly the same, this is not true elsewhere. In Gora, where they are all Muslim, most prefer to identify as Gorani, while only a minority identify as Macedonian, and others identify as Bulgarian or Albanian. Bulgarian and Albanian identities are correlated (in perhaps the same way that Romanian and Albanian identities are correlated for Vlachs in Albania -- because the more non-bordering state is not an irredentist threat.), and are strongest in the central region i.e. Golloborda; in Boboshtica and Drenova (the birthplace of the man who wrote the Albanian national anthem!) there is evidence nowadays that the Albanian identity is strong, and when non-Albanian identities were embraced in the past, the ones at play were Bulgarian and Polish (due to some local descent from Poles in the Middle Ages according to local oral history). On wiki it is largely acknowledged that Albania's Southeast Slavic speakers are not a single group -- no doubt in part because Albania itself has recognized both a Macedonian minority and a Bulgarian one. But the reality in Greece is that there are multiple identities at play there too, even if nationalists on all sides would prefer to say they are all (Slavic) Macedonians or all Macedonian Greeks -- the majority today clearly identify as Greeks, a small but significant minority identify as Macedonian, like in Albania there is also a large number of people with specific local identities akin to Gorani and Gollobordas identities, and although Bulgarian identity is largely missing today, this is not the case in the not-too-distant past. So why should we speak of a single ethnic group at all if there is no internal consensus on identity?
Overall, it may be more accurate in the long run to have an overarching page for rural populations of Slavic origin in northern Greece, and specific pages for each community -- like what you see (imperfectly implemented) in the Albanian case, where the Gora, Golloborda and Mala Prespa cases are quite appropriately treated as distinct, but within a broader framework. It makes little sense to artificially lump together the Slavs of Florina and Serres while excluding those of the southern Rhodopes.--Calthinus (talk) 14:51, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
These are all highly valid points, thanks for articulating it all so well. I think your idea of treating the topic with one overarching page covering the Slavs of northern Greece (including Thrace) and then specific pages for each community is probably the best solution. --Local hero 15:37, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
I am in favor of a split into Bulgarians in Greece, Ethnic Macedonians in Greece, Slavophone Greeks (these articles already exist in one form or another, as redirects), and so on. A split would address not just the problems Calthinus has pointed out, but also the problems the other editors also have also pointed out. If I understood right, someone here mentioned that the old discussion concluded with no consensus for split, due to POV Fork concerns, but that can't be a problem if all editors work hard to make sure that all POV concerns of all parties are addressed adequately during the split. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ 16:02, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
I'd have something in the vein of (if not exactly) East South Slavic communities of Northern Greece {i.e. East South Slavic as referring to the subfamily which includes the Bulgarian standard variety, the Macedonian variety, and many other varieties which may or may not be considered "languages}. "Slavophone Greeks" seems vaguer -- it could also mean a Greek person of Soviet Greek origin who likely speaks Russian, perhaps even as his or her mother tongue. That group could comprise nearly 100,000 people. I understand that Slavophone Greeks is what is used in a (Northern) Greek context, but it can be a bit ambiguous looking at the big picture.--Calthinus (talk) 16:47, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
That's a good point, Calthinus! I'm fine with your proposal.
Also we should not forget to add Ethnic Macedonians in Greece to the disambiguation page Macedonians in Greece. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ 18:24, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
As Jingiby has remarked, the current article structure has been decided in a RfC two and a half years ago, see here. Before anything is done with that structure, it will need a new RfC. --T*U (talk) 19:48, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Fair enough. I can start the process sometime in the next couple of days. --Local hero 04:26, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

RFC: Splitting this article

Should this article be split into Bulgarians in Greece, ethnic Macedonians in Greece, and East South Slavic communities of Northern Greece? See rationale discussed just above by @SilentResident, TU-nor, and Calthinus: and myself. --Local hero 03:22, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't struggle to find separate sources for Bulgarians in Greece, ethnic Macedonians in Greece, and Slavophone Greeks. The delineation is indeed not clean, I understand that, but I still do not believe the optimal treatment is lumping everything into an article about a linguistic group. --Local hero 01:36, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Sorry, I can see the motivation behind this, but I don't think it's a good idea. These would always be in danger of being little else than POV forks of each other, with almost their entire contents overlapping and dividing criteria extremely unclear. Generally speaking, it's a frequent tendency among Wikipedians to resort to article-splitting in order to evade the POV difficulties inherent in competing conceptual divisions of things, but it's not generally a reader-friendly solution. Readers don't want to read three articles when they could get the same information from a single one. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:20, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Conditional support: Like how I have stated in the previous discussion, (diff here: ) we have to make sure that all POV concerns of all parties are addressed adequately during the split. I believe the splitting of such a sensitive topic will require the broadest consensus as possible and for that, the editorial concerns on POV Fork problems must be taken into account and a discussion should open on how to address them. I will support the split once a thorough discussion is made to address the POV Forking concerns as expressed by others, such as Fut.Perf., and the issues related to delineation are addressed adequately. If we are here to improve Misplaced Pages, then an article split should be beneficial to the content's quality, not detrimental. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ 11:39, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
  • No way. Last time this was discussed, the title option for the non-Bulgarian and non-Macedonian category was "Slavophone Greeks", which is more or less synonymous with the current article title. The current proposal, "East South Slavic communities of Northern Greece", is imho completely clueless. With that title, the article would also have to include Pomaks. Grouping the Muslim, formerly mostly Bulgarian-speaking (and nowadays also more and more Turkish-speaking) Pomaks of Rhodopi and Xanthi together with the bilingual Macedonian-speaking (and more and more Greek-speaking) population of Slav ancestry in Macedonia in order to avoid having those with Greek and Macedonian identification in the same article, that is just nonsense.
The suggested article "ethnic Macedonians in Greece" would in any case just be a subgroup of the "Esat South Slavic ..." group, so it would constitute a clear content fork, and as for the suggested article "Bulgarians in Greece" ... Well, either it would have to be about the modern Bulgarian diaspora in Greece (75,915 Bulgarian citizens according to the 2011 census) or it would have to be about the ethnic 'Slavophones' (for lack of a better word) with Bulgarian identification, which would probably add up to a total of 0 after WWII. In the first case, it could be made into an article with no relation to the current discussion. In the second case, it would all belong in the history section of the current article, where it is already prominently discussed. There is, of course, a third option: to group them with the Pomaks, in which case the mess would be complete. --T*U (talk) 12:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I suppose the Bulgarians and ethnic Macedonians articles would be subgroup articles of this one (whatever it may or may not be renamed to), but I'm not sure why that automatically makes it a content fork. There is a distinct subset of this group that today identifies ethnically as Macedonian, whether in Greece or outside it. The Bulgarian subgroup would be more historical but also include information on the, as you point out, over 75,000 Bulgarians in all of Greece. I mean, we have an article for the 872 Bulgarians in Croatia, but not far larger community of Bulgarians in Greece? --Local hero 21:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
This. Agree with what Local hero said. I was worried that the lack of proper articles Ethnic Macedonians in Greece and Bulgarians in Greece had somehow to do with the Macedonian Question, and I had the personal impression it was influencing Misplaced Pages somehow. I really don't want this to be the case here at all, and that the POV concerns others have expressed above, are just the only reasons this wasn't split so far. While it is understandable that the editors have POV forking concerns, still I am not sure why there can't be an article about these other ethnicities living in Greece while there is for the Albanians in Greece. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ 10:23, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
That's a great example. We somehow manage to have articles for both Arvanites and Albanians in Greece. --Local hero 17:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
Yes... exactly. --Calthinus (talk) 03:08, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
@TU-nor: Imo, your distinction between Pomaks being Muslim and the communities further West being Christian is a bit misled. The majority of this article's referents live in diaspora. Part of that diaspora is in Turkey. Much of the diaspora in Turkey is Muslim Slavs from Macedonia. The entire region surrounding the Moglen, for example, was once Muslim Slav. Cutting off Pomaks historically from their nearby linguistic and religious historical brethren just a bit west is really quite contrived... and seems to reflect a dubious POV that these Pomaks are somehow "Bulgarian-esque" while Muslims further west are "Macedonian-esque" ... with zero support in sourcing for this whatsoever. They were both even once called "Pomaks". --Calthinus (talk) 03:08, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
I did not mean to make Muslim/Christian an essential distinction, and I frankly cannot see how my comment could be interpreted that way. My intention was just to illustrate that there are deeper variations within the group "East South Slavic communities" than between "ethnic Macedonians in Greece" and the rest of the group, which imo makes the suggested split unnatural and artificial.
I have not forgotten the diaspora of Muslim Slavs from Macedonia in Turkey. (I have even met some of them.) But it seems that the article has forgotten them. They are currently not mentioned at all in the article, which is rather strange. By the way, the Moglena region was not entirely Muslim Slav. There were also a significant number of Megleno-Romanians in that region. But that is an aside.
As for the Pomaks, I will not be entering any discussion of Bulgarian-ness or Macedonian-ness. There are, however, good reasons for having a separate article about Pomaks, given their history the last 100 years is different from all other subgroups. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TU-nor (talk • contribs) 11:54, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Sorry about forgetting to sign. --T*U (talk) 22:14, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
You should probs sign your post TU-nor. And yea this is why I said surrounding the Moglen. But I see no justification whatsoever for totally artificial distinctions like Slavs in Turkey from West Thrace versus from near Moglen/Almopia, or why the latter are somehow supposedly more like Muslim Slavs from Kastoria or Florina. You're not entering any discussion about the supposed Bulgarian-ness of Pomaks yet you seem to be accidentally asserting either that or a religious distinction, as there is no clear other distinction at all. Then theres the fact that "Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia" include tens of thousands of *immigrants*, who although not covered are somehow supposedly changed the second they buy property in Greek Macedonia as opposed to anywhere else in Greece. For neither the Aromanian nor Albanian speaking populations do we have such an insanely contrived distinction as policy.--Calthinus (talk) 18:10, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
I agree with Calthinus. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ 20:34, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Apologies, I only went this route because of the previous RFC. --Local hero 21:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

 Comment: Seeing how so many editors are firmly against splitting the Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia, and so few are seemingly in favor of it, maybe it is that the POV forking's severity is eluding me. I will try read the archived discussions and I won't try convince the editors into agreeing to split the article. However, everyone should bear in mind that the article Bulgarians in Greece may be a necessity regardless of the RfC's outcome, since Bulgarian migrants have settled all over Greece and they can not be covered by the present article, whose scope is only the Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia. Good day. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ 23:28, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Agree. It seems really weird in particular that we have this implication, with this articles title that Bulgarian immigrants to Greek Macedonia are somehow different from Bulgarian immigrants to any other part of Greece. Nobody has engaged with this yet, but it is a really, really bizarre policy.--Calthinus (talk) 03:12, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

 Comment: Hi all, sorry I'm late, it's been a really crazy week... I guess we ended up having an RfC on a split? This wasn't exactly my intention... I think. There is something awkward about this because, you see, this page doesn't actually cover Macedonians or Bulgarians in Greece currently. It should they are a notable topic, but it doesn't, yet. Even though they are technically within its topic scope. The sole way it is covered is with the infobox Bulgarian diaspora. So... it feels a bit awkward to treat this as a "split" proposal...in fact what I was proposing originally felt more like a merge proposal... --Calthinus (talk) 03:08, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

So by "merge", do you mean to keep this one article but expand the topics that are currently lacking? --Local hero 16:29, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Merge with Pomaks I guess. This was half cooked on my part. It would be a split if this article included info on Bulgarian and Macedonian nationals in Greece. But despite the fact that Bulgarians are the second largest immigrant group in Greece after Albanians (or were last this was measured in the 2011 paper I can access), we somehow don't, so it's I guess also an embryonic split. --Calthinus (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Not very helpful of the Oppose folks to just drop in for a single comment each and not actually contribute to the discussion. I guess coverage of this topic will just remain in its mediocre state. --Local hero 03:04, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Agree, but what can we expect, we all have lives. One way to improve this all given time on someone's part is to actually write the material for Bulgarian immigrants in Greece. Maybe in mine or someone else's sandbox at first. --Calthinus (talk) 18:17, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

We should have an article for the Macedonian minority of Greece, then, Jingiby. Fine, I’ll give you that some or many in the Slavic speaking community of Greece may not identify as Macedonian, they may identify as Bulgarian or something else. Fine, then let’s create an article for these minorities, because it is clear that they exist, there is no doubt that a Macedonian minority of tens of thousands of people if not more exists in Greece, as attested by every reliable source in this article. Veritaes Unam (talk) 14:23, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Calthinus, you find problematic “anything that implies a Macedonian identity on the model of the state identity of North Macedonia as applied to all recently Slavic descended individuals in the region.”

Now, I wasn’t trying to say that all Slavs in Greece are Macedonian, there may be Bulgarians, Serbs and others. But reading this article, it seems plainly clear that it is dealing with those Slavs that speak the language we know as Macedonian, many of whom have a Macedonian identity. This article is talking about them, but refuses to call them “Macedonian.” Are you saying that many of these Macedonian speaking Slavs are actually Bulgarians? Veritaes Unam (talk) 14:52, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Their language is not uncontroversially designated as Macedonian, especially as the criteria for determining what is a Macedonian dialect still have to be worked out. Why are Macedonian and Bulgarian the only two options? Simply forcing these populations to be "Macedonians" is hardly any different from forcing the inhabitants of North Macedonia to be "Bulgarians", which is beyond ironic. --Calthinus (talk) 14:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Unnecessary diminishing language

The introduction states that this group "...are mostly concentrated in certain parts of the peripheries of West and Central Macedonia..." Peripheries is the Greek term for "Regions", but in English it has the connotation of being "the outer limits or edge of an area or object," giving the reader a very different sense of where this group lives, which is reinforced by the words "concentrated" and "certain parts of...". This wording of this sentence strongly, unnecessarily, and without citation, conveys a particular image about the size and make-up of this population. The rest of the sentence also contains similar unnecessary language that invites the reader to infer uncited claims about the population in question. A recommended edit for the opening sentence, which conveys the same factual information, without any loaded language is:

"Slavic speakers are a minority population in the country of Greece, who live mostly in the regions of West and Central Macedonia, which border the state of North Macedonia. 66.71.89.72 (talk) 18:10, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Categories: