Jump to content

User talk:Francis Tyers/Archive7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Vlatkoto (talk | contribs) at 10:34, 9 May 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Warning! Inflammatory nationalist rhetoric may be removed at any time without notification.

... the third party's weapon is not a self loading rifle but his ability without force or threats to persuade both sides to avoid violence and settle their differences by peaceful means ... - The Peacekeeper's Handbook

To be unpopular with both sides at the same time is probably the best pointer to the fact that one is performing one's duties correctly and with impartiality. - The Peacekeeper's Handbook


I archive my talk page when it gets longer than is preferable. You should too!


Dearest Balkanians

It's been real. :) - FrancisTyers 02:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, a Balkanian talking:p
I do not know why, but what u wrote 'bout Roman Jakobson attracted my interest...maybe cause i have read a lot about him. he mostly worked on the Comparative Literature field. and also, he lived several decades ago, so he is allowed to have made mistakes. but his work was rather important, although in linguistics, another Jewish, Noam Chomsky, offered more. If u know anything that Chomsky has ever said about the 'Macedonian' language, i would be glad to know;) --Hectorian 02:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I'm aware Chomsky hasn't written anything on Macedonian. IIRC he isn't particularly interested in the sociolinguistics aspect and generally works only in English. He's more into the "linguistics as a faculty of the mind" deal. One quote I have on my page about the language/dialect issue is "The term "language" as used in ordinary discourse involves obscure sociopolitical and normative factors. It is doubtful that we can give a coherent account of how the term is actually used". Basically saying that the word in popular usage is pretty incoherent, as in there is no particular linguistic classification for "language" as opposed to "dialect" or "idiolect". For Chomskyan linguistics, a nice (and fairly easy and up-to-date) introduction is here. Actually reading Chomsky's work is pretty difficult. He writes very thick prose. :) If you have any other questions, let me know :) - FrancisTyers 02:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, i know how he writes...i had to read works of his for my university studies. maybe the best definition for what a language is, is what someone said (i guess it was Niccolò Machiavelli): language is a dialect with a government and an army...BTW, interesting link;). i will check it! --Hectorian 02:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Generally attributed to Max Weinreich, see Language-dialect aphorism. :) - FrancisTyers 02:31, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe,u are right;). i altered it a bit (without knowing), but i guess it fits in this case: FYROM does not have a navy... --Hectorian 02:36, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
True, they don't even have a port. However, as I point out in my essay, although the adage captures a lot of truth, it is by no means perfect :) Wales has a Welsh language but no Army or Navy. The Basque country has a Basque language but no Army or Navy. Those are some Abstand languages, now for the Ausbau... the Czech republic has a Czech language but no Navy. Luxembourg has Luxembourgish but no Navy ;) - FrancisTyers 02:46, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know;). i do not accept Max Weinreich's theory. if u want to listen to my POV, the definition of language relays on the mutual intillegibility between the speakers. i, of course, know that this definition fits perfectly to the Greek language (since its closest relatives-Latin or Armenian-do not sound familiar to us), but for other languages from other branches of ling. families things are complicated. but trust me, i have more difficulties in understanding Pontic Greek, than a Bulgarian has in understanding a 'Macedonian'. it is like the Americans saying that they speak 'american' and not 'english';) --Hectorian 02:54, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

nationalism/racial supremacy

Hello Francis,

I see you are opposed to nationalism -- a good thing. But could you tell me why you support talk like "we're the baddest, most beautiful things on god's green earth"? It seems supremacist to me. I hope that together we can unite to oppose editors who use this sort of language.

Justforasecond 16:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi

defending your country, your history and your existence isnt unbridled nationalism, its normal and your right to do so. i dont claim greek history, i am claiming my own history wich has been stolen by greece and even by bulgaria. isnt it normal to defend myself then?? greetings --Makedonia 11:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah right :-) Telex 11:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nationalist test

I don't blame todays Turks for the deaths, that is referring to the Turks at the time. I'm blaming todays Turks for denying that it happened, as is the policy of the Turkish government. If you are going against the policy of your government I salute you! :) Perhaps I could make this more explicit, I encourage you to offer alternative suggestions.

Now..you're blaming Turks for denying it. You decided that it happened but there are other sources, other views, etc. Everybody can think different based on these sources. I wouldn't blame anybody because they think it happened. If anybody is denying it blindly, then you found the nationalist you're looking for. But how can you distiguish that, I don't know.

With regard to the Welsh economy, I would advise that you look into it if you have the time. There is of course the chance that someone would step in to take the place of England in the subsidising stakes, but that is not the point. Skirts are kilts for women? LOL :)) Unfortunately if you ask most people if they are nationalist they would reply no, because they don't really think about it. This test has the effect of making people think. As I have done (as you can see on the talk page).

That's the point. Do they really don't think of it or do they have reasons to oppose the statements? How can you know they replied without thinking or without any sound reason? Maybe you should try to state just facts. So there would be no doubt if they oppose. But finding the fact about this kind of matters is not so easy. --levent 19:30, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


User count graph on HospitalityClub page

Hi, sorry for taking so long to reply. I did not login to Wikipedia for a very long time. I can't see the data you generate the graph from because the page doesn't exist anymore. But no problem. I accept your explanation and last I checked, it seems the graph got somehow improved. My only objection which remains is that it is unclear what on the graph is data points and what is a fit line. So perhaps, if you are sampling the user count every day since 1/1/2003, you should add something like this to the graph description: "Graph of user growth on HC. Since 1/1/2003 the number of users is sampled every day. The data before 1/1/2003 are based on rough statistics provided on the HC page and are inacurate." Something like that. I'm actually quite impressed. I was thinking the graph is some very amateurish work of someone who didn't know how to put points, so he has drawen the whole line, while actually you appear to be sampling with a good frequency which makes it possible to draw such a detailed graph. But you need to explain, because otherwise the reader has no way to know this :) Thank you! --hhanke 23:35, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very good! It is fixed now. Thank you! I've also added a comment to Talk:HospitalityClub. I wonder if the whole thread with my comment should be removed now? Feel free to do so. I have no more objections and I think the graph is very useful now. --hhanke 21:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Well, I see the following possibilities:

Your guess is as good as mine... Telex 14:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go for the last one. :) FunkyFly 15:47, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why's that? Telex 14:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, if you're interested in the Arvanites, I've written a little article on them over at sqwiki: sq:Arvanitët. Telex 15:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You still haven't told be why you reject the possibility of option no. 4 being the one. Telex 15:23, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think you know why :) - FrancisTyers 15:28, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly have no idea. Telex 15:29, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Glocalisation"

yes, "sic" - I had read the article, and knew it wasn't a spelling error. That's exactly why I put that "sic" in... :-) BTW, I hear you are studying with Trudgill? Lukas (T.|@) 15:30, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought sic was used when there was a spelling mistake that should be acknowledged. However I just read the article and I see its for "unusual" spellings too. - FrancisTyers 15:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, good, so you wouldn't mind if we put it back in? - I'd seen a reference to your essay somewhere and gave it a cursory look the other day. Certainly looks like a nice piece of work - good to have some linguistics-savvy people around here. And I'm glad to hear you liked Trudgill as a teacher - we are currently planning to get him as a visiting professor at our place some time next year. Lukas (T.|@) 15:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no problem :) Btw, I highly recommend Trudgill (in case you hadn't got that before) :) - FrancisTyers 15:45, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering...

... have you ever considered writing from a neutral point of view? I bet I just exposed myself (which option at #Reply is true). Telex 21:29, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Francis

Just a heads up, no conflicts or problems. It appears that anon, aka Btar, is now editing Tourette syndrome as Karmak. Hope all is well with you! Sandy 08:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Refs

My bad! :p —Khoikhoi 09:23, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, no worries. I really gotta get some sleep, sayonara. Oh yeah, someone should add "Japanese nationalist" - the Rape of Nanjing was more than an 'incident', and Japanese soldiers did use women from Korea as confort women during WWII. —Khoikhoi 09:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cywiki

I didn't know you spoke Welsh... Telex 16:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, you are crediting the Serb nationalist line to Holy, when it was me [1]. Telex 17:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cut and paste moves are wrong. Telex 17:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any idea why people always calling me a nationalist, when I am a cosmopolitan [2]). User:HolyRomanEmperor a fellow self-described cosmopolitan (on his userpage) gets the same thing [3]. I guess it's something we cosmopolitans will just have to live with :-( Telex 17:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I find thy reply offensive. Unlike thee (which evidently hast thine own agenda) I strive for NPOV, on all Wikipedias my linguistic knowledge enables me to. Telex 18:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BTW see this version. Telex 18:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite - I am and always have been neutral on all issues. I also think this discussion in broken Welsh over at cywiki should end, as we've had this discussion countless times in English over here (and we know we're not going to agree - your agenda won't let you see what truly is neutral). Telex 18:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you do have Welsh friends there ask them how my Welsh is? I cannot tell you if I'm a native speaker or not - I could be, I'm a cosmopolitan. Personally, my favorite version was [4]. Telex 18:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, while you're at it, get a Welsh translation for my userpage. Telex 18:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, if you like the version with the many languages - do say so here giving your reasons (I'd like to have Arvanitika, Aromanian, Bulgarian, Turkish etc names at Portal:Greece, but we don't know them - we only know the foreign abstand languages, not the local dialects). Telex 18:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, you're missing the point (see Portal:Greece). I don't think that it's fair to say that Pomak is the same as Bulgarian, nor that Arvanitika is the same as Albanian. For all I know, in Arvanitika, Greece could be "Hellas", not Greqi. The languages you are talking about in R. Macedonia are officially recognised and have a standard form in that country (for official publications). In the case of the officially denied language in Greece, names could vary from dialect to dialect. Telex 20:12, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone e-mailed you, though? :-)

Francis, the situation in R. Macedonia is that Albanian is official only in the Albanian municipalties. That is similar, as Aldux said in the talk about the portal, like South Tyrol in Italy. There, the German language is official, but that is not a reason the German langauge to be used in such similar cases as this. Therefore, I think this is unnecessary. Still, Albanian is official in Albania for the level you refer to. Regards, Bomac 18:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian is also spoken in the national parliament in Shkupi. Telex 18:12, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only by the Albanian politicians. Bomac 18:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's because I'm a cosmopolitan (just like Telex) and I think that all South Slavic languages are mutually intelligible. How's that? :-) Bomac 19:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's mainly 'caus I come from Macedonia. You can see all the South-Slavic languages in that MK if you want. But, not in that N (native), because I really have difiiculties with Bulgarian or Serbian synthax (or sentence construction). Not to mention the words I hardly understand and look weird to me. Bomac 20:23, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Eastern group of South Slavic languages, not just South. And I presume Pontic Greek would look much weirder to you if you were Greek... NikoSilver  (T) @ (C) 20:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. But my user page esthetical-impact is a bit of ruined... :-) Bomac 20:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but Montenegrin and Bosnian are not included in SH. And SH does not makes any difference. Bomac 21:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, yes... Done that too. Bomac 21:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So, what are you waiting for, will you re-add ,,only Macedonia" or that word is a HEAVILLY big problem? ;-) Bomac 10:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for assistance

Could you please check out a dispute I am involved in on the article Montgomery Academy. An anonymous editor has an issue with stating that the school was founded as the result of desegregation. While other editors examined the issue and said the article was balanced and provided references, to be safe I added even more references to support the article (including an article in a respected newspaper quoting the school's current headmaster as saying the school was formed b/c of desegregation). I have repeatedly asked this anonymous editor to provide a reference, any reference, to back up her claims but she says she can't do that. Despite this, she keeps changing the article and arguing on the talk page and has caused another editor to say this must be taken to mediation. Could you check out the issue and state what you see? In my opinion it is not reasonable to ask for mediation when one editor won't even abide by the most basic tenets of Wikipedia (no original research and provide references). Obviously I'm frustrated so any assistance you can provide would be welcome. Thanks.--Alabamaboy 21:23, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self, do not edit late at night when sleepy

Hey dude, sorry for mixing up the intent for the nationalist page. Still a cool page though! Later. Tombseye 02:11, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Francis

Hi, I know we have our differences, but I wanted to say I appreciate your general command in articles and resources. I also like your efforts against nationalistic approach. I hope we can work together to improve the articles.

By the way, about that Denmark issue we had, I personally don't support the restriction of mother-tongue broadcasts, in Turkey we have lots of ethnicities and it's a richness. I lived in the Netherlands for 5.5 years and I know how one misses to hear his/her own language. It's something good that it's been corrected nowadays in Turkey.

However it's stated in our media that Roj TV is actually broadcasting materials supporting PKK actions, mentioning killed terrorists as martyrs, inciting violent demonstrations etc, which is a strong debacle now in Turkey. That's why Turkish public in general is not happy with Denmark nor Roj. I hope my position is clear. Cheers --Gokhan 12:39, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tell Francis how it is corrected too. How the TRT (the Turkish BBC- I wish it could be as good as) channel broadcasts only for an hour a week to the more then 20 million Kurds of 70 Million Turkey. How in other channels Kurdish politicians STILL cannot speak Kurdish. Before looking at what ROJ TV is broadcasting check out Flash TV, Mesaj TV and so on... The Turkish God TVs with some political point of views. That is where the problem is. The solution is that everyone should have the freedom to broadcast that's why I don't watch TV and go online. Anyways, thanks for the warm welcome Francis. Ozgur Gerilla 22:54, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ozgur, nobody says the problem is totally corrected. However it is being worked on, which is better than nothing. I hope you'll stop supporting that bloody terrorist organization called PKK by the way. More bloodshed won't bring more freedom - that's for sure.
Francis, you're right about Roj, I didn't watch myself, also cannot because I don't speak the language. But someday I would like to learn and understand. Anyway until that day, I'll try to find more sources :) Cheers. --Gokhan 17:02, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Wp Admin

Hello! I hope you're well; I'm on a wikibreak of sorts ... ha! But thank you for your praise and request: I appreciate it! I've been similarly encouraged by others to become a Wp Administrator.

However, I respectfully decline to an RfAdmin or to become an Admin at this time. I feel that my current level of activity would not be helped or hindered by becoming an Admin. I may reconsider this at some later date (and one of the advocates I mentioned wants to nominate me later), but I'm not ambitious – or perhaps foolish? ;) – enough to pass that bar just yet.

Please let me know if you've any questions; thanks again! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 15:57, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Francis, I would like to thank you for the warm welcome message. The links on the Welcome section are also very useful. Thanks and take care. Ozgur Gerilla 23:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I totally agree with what you said here User talk:Gokhan#PKK. The is a unique problem with the Turkish media, a problem that is restricting different cultures & minds to be broadcast. I think you should watch Roj TV yourself. Ozgur Gerilla 23:55, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Have you checked the Roj TV link? It's an external link where you can watch the channel but it's closed now :) Ozgur Gerilla 00:19, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aromanians

Hehe, nice image in Portal talk:Greece:)...(and as u said, totally irrelevant to the greeks) the examples that u used, fit in the respective people and countries, and in most of them i agree with. but u (me and all the rest) should have in mind that we cannot judge everything according to something that may or may not look like it. i will answer to what u've said in the same order, one by one (by speaking about the aromanians in greece):

  1. i have never heard of this guy, neither in greece nor on the net. are u 100% sure that he was arrested or 100% sure about the reason that he was arrested? would i be left untouched in the UK (i won't use France as an example) if i would be seen throwing leaflets against your Queen or government or talking about separation of Scotland, N. Ireland, Wales? or about giving the Fawklants to Argentina? maybe the cases are not similar, but stupid laws (that give to a government the "right" to arrest someone) exist everywhere. (I know some stupid english laws as well). and again: maybe that guy was arrested for another reason.
  2. maybe u did not understand what i said before: the aromanians are bilingual. we speak greek and aromanian since childhood. (make a relevancy with your dialect-guess u have one, and that u are not from London-and standard british english. u would never adress to a court using a dialect, but only in standard english. moreover, the aromanian language never had a written form (as it derived from Vulgar Latin, after its usage by greek-speaking people). this is why the vlachs in greece have always been bilingual, this is why they have always considered themselves greeks, and this is why their language consists by 40% greek words.
  3. i know Ozal (he died the day Mitsotakis-the worst bad-luck-giver ever) visited him):). he denied his origins. turkey wants to assimilate the kurds. as i said above (and u did not comment on that) the former greek president told the aromanians to use their language as much as they can!Karolos Papoulias had taken part in the anual meeting of the aromanians on 1995 (i had personally see him-he was minister of foreign affairs that time). is it so hard to believe that the aromanians are just like the cretans or the peloponneseans?
  4. the kurds have many differences with the turks. any attempt to make the aromanians seem as distinct from the rest of the greeks, has no gravity. the only difference is the 2nd mother tangue that we have. that's all, and nothing more...furthermore, the aromanians never demanded anything different from the other greeks. and in no case in history were we against the rest of the greeks. there was never a civil unrest, war, rebelion concerning them.
  5. what u probably do not know, is that the organisations of the aromanians in greece and in the greek dispora, asked from the Council of Europe (supervisor of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages) to stop trying to present the aromanians as a non-greek minority. we do not want a minority status for our 2nd language. to your information, it is not a language like english or greek. as a speaker of it and as a student of greek and latin literature and linguistics, i can tell u that it is a latin idiom, developed for a commerce usage, in a period when latin was the official language of the area (up till 7th cent.), with no written form, no writers or poets (all the aromanians poets have always used greek), no personal or place names, no ecclesiastical definitions, with 40% greek words (without counting prepositions, articles (remember that latin has no articles!), word endings-i cannot remember how they are called:)...)...

hope i helped u understand. if not, the whole internet is waiting for u to figure that out. and if u get confused, maybe visit greece once more to assure yourself:)--Hectorian 02:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Babysitting required

Salut, we need babysitting over at Talk:Macedonians (ethnic group). The discussion has really gone off topic (renaming the article) due to the fact that Bomac has been bluffing about what Krste Misirkov is alleged to have said (it's not his fault, that's what they are taught in Skopje). Could you help? Telex 18:03, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Macedonia

Sure; on p. 663 of the Encyclopædia Britannica Book of the Year 2003 (ISBN 0-85229-956-7), the entry for Macedonia (typically one country per page, sometimes more) indicates the following uptop:

  • Official name1: Republika Makedonija (Republic of Macedonia).
...
  • Official languages2: Macedonian; Albanian.

The footnote(s) below indicate the following:

  • 1 Member of the United Nations under the name The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. 2 Albanian was made an official language in June 2002. . . .

which is verbatim the note I added to the infobox, with other content since embellished.

Given recent goings-on, I've included the first note regarding the name too. :) I can scan the page if you wish; please let me know if you've any questions. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 21:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that; it's helpful. I'm all for massaging relevant notations, but not nixing the note I added, as it's cited; perhaps a link to the information you've provided can be included as well. I'm remiss to get into a pissing match over including information that is easily verifiable. Thoughts? Thanks. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 22:03, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. Relatedly, user blocks are regrettable but sometimes necessary. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 00:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vlatko

What are we going to do about Vlatko. Should I report him for violating the 3RR or will you block him now? Telex 00:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I've reported him. Telex 00:20, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check the revision history of Blagoevgrad Province to see the kind of things he does ;-) Telex 00:30, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should ask User:Bet 0 about the Ohrid Agreement - he should know. Telex 00:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ganeshk violates 3RR

This user has begun a unnecessary revert war in Ajith. He first fiddled with the salary figures for the actor changing them from 35 million to 3.5 million (35 lakhs). Then he removed the nickname and supporting links without a pretense of a discussion. He has already reverted the article twice today. Now he is threatening to block me citing 3RR when I try to undo his vandalisms. Please restrain him Anwar saadat 00:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user has blanked links to songs to copyright-free IPRS licensed websites. This user has violated 3RR - 1st revert, 2nd revert, 3rd revert. Please block him and undo his changes to this version. Anwar saadat 11:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't even bother to look, only one of these is a revert. Lukas (T.|@) 11:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Again

As you should have understood what is written in the ohrid agreemend. It is said that only the macedonian is official and other languages only regulated by law. As no other language is regulated by law as an official, it is only the macedonian. How can u confuse the day and the night, hahahahaha! Vlatko 03:04, 07 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW

What is this supposed to mean? Telex 15:20, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look at my observations at User talk:Makedonia. Even if their nationalistic estimates on the ethnic composition of Greek Macedonia are accurate (280,000 - extremely doubtful), in this hypothetical "United Macedonia", the largest ethnic group would be Greeks - so it would be anything but a "Macedonian nation state and homeland", but rather a multiethnic Yugoslavia with the Greeks dominating politics, which would eventually end up fragmentating. Why do they want it then? I very much doubt they'd "expulse" the Greek population like they allege the Greek authorities did to the ethnicity which hadn't yet been invented at the time the alleged incident took place, and get away with it. Milošević tried tricks like that - didn't work. Telex 15:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Should I even bother trying moving it back? BTW there's a little note that need answering at talk. Telex 20:54, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Tell me, in your opinion, what do you think my word'll carry more weight as, an Arvanite or as an Albanian (so I know what to claim to be). You can find a rather accurate contrast in the Greece section of this article. Which group would you trust more? Telex 22:14, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See this article which says the following: Aromanians (Vlachs) and Arberor (Arvanites) refuse to join forces with Macedonians (and Turks) to enable Greece, like all other EU countries, to get a national office of the European Bureau for Lesser Used Languages. Now do you believe that Arvanites and Aromanians don't want minority rights - I think I and Hectorian have proved that already though. Telex 22:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I think you should include all south easern Europeans in the partisan group. Last time there was a vote, Bitola/MatriX spammed all the pages of the former Yugoslavia and Turkey with a link to the poll, eg [5], [6], [7]. Telex 22:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, include Canada!! (I posted a comment in the lang-talk about the map. Please reply, as it needs some time to be prepared...) NikoSilver  (T) @ (C) 22:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't know that non-ethnic Greek could have their citizenship withdrawn? It's from your own amnesty international source [8]. Telex 00:34, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

El kondor pada

The article was originally deleted because nobody can come up with references claiming its notability. The article, rewritten or not, is still unsourced. nobody has proven the article's notability. User:Zoe|(talk) 18:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Francis, could you help me on Bitola, as MatriX has reverted my edits on the ground that they are unsourced [9] when I had cited sources (the only sources). Could you please do something. Telex 20:23, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Francis, before making any conclusions, bear in mind that there was an extensive edit war about this article that was resolved by reaching a compromise solution (see the talk page of the article) that was disrupted today by Telex. MatriX 20:29, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing, can you please take a look at the Macedonians (ethnic group)? I tried to make some really constructive edits (see the talk page) but now I'm reverted without even discussing it on the talk page (I'm really tired by these Greek users who think they can do everything just because are more in number then us)MatriX 20:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On Macedonians (ethnic group) you made a massive unilateral edit eliminating weeks of other people's work and replacing it with your POV and expect us to accept it? I tread on eggshells everytime I want to modify that artice. You need consensus (or at least I do when I want to change something - are you an exception?) Telex 20:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can't I cite Von Hahn and Ami Boué and present their opinions on the etymology of the name Bitola (I even gave book and page), and you call it unsourced? Propaganda has it's limits - what sources have you cited? Nothing. Telex 20:31, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How about now? Telex 21:23, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello- What is a rationale? Can someone direct me to it so I can post a link? (Knottykid 21:26, 8 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

He reverted again (from a sourced version to an unsourced version) - what do I do? If you don't believe me, click here (you need Gmail access). Telex 22:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have nothing against the real facts. I will readd that info now.MatriX 22:19, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Come on Fran, didn't you have time to check those "sources" yet? (...and then they blame people for instantly reverting them at sight...)  NikoSilver  (T) @ (C) 23:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HI

Hi, how are you? I hope we understood the mestake we have made regarding to Macedonia's official language(s). OK, this is mine POV and strong posision: The ohrid agreement was deliverd in 2001 as a document througt wich the state should transform in the next four year.Its implementation is an clone image of what the agreement is. OK to the "official language", througt the implementation of the agreement there were brought several laws as the law of the languages, Only the macedonian finished as official on the entire teritory and in international relations the other minority languages were defined only as municipality languages. I expect an opinion from you soon. Vlatko 12:19, 09 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the constitution mentions Macedonian by name as the primary official language and states that any other language spoken by at least 20% of the total poplation is also official. It does not mention Albanian by name, but Albanian does fulful that requirement, hence is an official language at national level (Britannica confirms it). Telex 10:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is written so as you say, but it sais if only defined by law, and there is no law i know that defines other language than macedonian to be official.

The ohrid agreement is only an agreement not to be confused with a law brought by the parlament, i Will repeat agin , we must diferentiate the agreement and its implementation, and throught the imlementation the albanian finished not as an official language, only the macedonian. Vlatko 12:33, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]