|
To a large extent, the [[design]] of a '''CPU''', or [[central processing unit]], is the design of its [[control unit]]. The modern (ie, 1965 to 1985) way to design control logic is to write a [[microprogram]].
{{oldpeerreview}}
CPU design was originally an [[ad-hoc]] process. Just getting a CPU to work was a substantial governmental and technical event.
== Article lock ==
Key design innovations include [[CPU cache|cache]], [[virtual memory]], [[instruction pipelining]], [[superscalar]], [[CISC]], [[RISC]], [[virtual machine]], [[emulators]], [[microprogram]], and [[Stack (computing)|Stack]].
I noticed an edit war going on here. Can we discuss having this article locked like [[Macedonian Slavs]]?
Why do Greek people object to the historic Slav name [[Solun]]? Vladko
===History of Macedonia===
::2.4 Independence of the Republic of Macedonia
::2.5 Controversy: Republic of Macedonia and Greece
::2.6 Controversy: Republic of Macedonia and Bulgaria
::2.7 Macedonia and the Yugoslav Wars
== History of general purpose CPUs ==
This history, is history of [[FYROM]]!
Not history of article "[[Macedonia]]"
::[[User:Vergina|Vergina]] 20:28, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
===Get a1950s: psychiatrist,early designs Philareth===
Get a psychatrist, Philareth, you are in a desperate need of one. Did you actually have foam on your mouth when you wrote that crap above? Because you behave as if you have rabies. And learn my name, it is not VMRO but VMORO. I'll go to the marshes when you pack your bags and go to Asia Minor. I am sure the Turks will organize you a gracious welcome for you, haha... [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]
Each of the computer designs of the early 1950s was a unique design; there were no upward-compatible machines or computer architectures with multiple, differing implementations. Programs written for one machine would not run on another kind, even other kinds from the same company. This was not a major drawback at the time because there was not a large body of software developed to run on computers, so starting programming from scratch was not seen as a large barrier.
The design freedom of the time was very important, for designers were very constrained by the cost of electronics, yet just beginning to explore how a computer could best be organized. Some of the basic features introduced during this period included [[index registers]] (on the [[Ferranti Mark I]]), a return-address saving instruction ([[UNIVAC I]]), immediate operands ([[IBM 704]]), and the detection of invalid operations ([[IBM 650]]).
Yeah, and something else - if that (meaning the [[Sad lot]] piece of prose) is a manifestation of Greek intellect, then Greece is in deep shit. Enjoy. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]
By the end of the [[1950]]s commercial builders had developed factory-constructed, truck-deliverable computers. The most widely installed computer was the [[IBM 650]], which used [[drum memory]] onto which programs were loaded using either [[punched tape|paper tape]] or [[punch card]]s. Some very high-end machines also included [[core memory]] which provided higher speeds. [[Hard disk]]s were also starting to become popular.
: Your calling me names will not deter me from continuing to oppose your VMRO propaganda until it is completely removed from this Macedonia article. You may be a paid agent of the VMRO or of FYROM or I don't care who, but I don't need compensation other than the truth. I have no agenda to occupy or expand (like you and your buddies trying to invade Greece all the way to Thessaloniki). I just will not allow you to spread your filth here. [[User:Philaleth|Philaleth]] 12:09, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Computers are automatic [[Abacus|abaci]]. The type of number system affects the way they work. In the early [[1950s]] most computers were built for specific numerical processing tasks, and many machines used decimal numbers as their basic number system – that is, the mathematical functions of the machines worked in base-10 instead of base-2 as is common today. These were not merely [[binary coded decimal]]. The machines actually had ten vacuum tubes per digit in each [[Processor register|register]]. Some early [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] computer designers implemented systems based on ternary logic; that is, a bit could have three states: +1, 0, or -1, corresponding to positive, no, or negative voltage.
An early project for the [[U.S. Air Force]], [[BINAC]] attempted to make a lightweight, simple computer by using binary arithmetic. It deeply impressed the industry.
As late as 1970, major computer languages such as "[[C_language|C]]" were unable to standardize their numeric behavior because decimal computers had groups of users too large to alienate.
CAN WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?!?!?!?! MACEDONIA IS AFRICA! FOREVER!
Even when designers used a binary system, they still had many odd ideas. Some used sign-magnitude arthmetic (-1 = 10001), rather than modern [[two's complement]] arithmetic (-1 = 11111). Most computers used six-bit character sets, because they adequately encoded [[Hollerith]] cards. It was a major revelation to designers of this period to realize that the data word should be a multiple of the character size. They began to design computers with 12, 24 and 36 bit data words.
I am a Macedonian, and i think writing this "get a psychiatrist" text is very pointless and does not represent Macedonian Opinion (its completly individual opinion)
In this era, [[Grosch's law]] dominated computer design: Computer cost increased as the square of its speed.
==Macedonians at the Olympics==
=== 1960s: the computer revolution and CISC ===
[[User:Vergina|Vergina]] has contributed the following text but putting it at the end of the article is clearly inappropriate, so I've moved it here for discussion. The content appears to have been lifted from http://www.helleniccomserve.com/olympicmacedonians.htm (so it may also be a copyvio); perhaps it would be more appropriate to link out to that web page. I feel that it may be an unnecessary level of detail to go into in what is supposed to be an overview article. -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] 16:30, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
One major problem with early computers was that a program for one would not work on others. Computer companies found that their customers had little reason to remain loyal to a particular brand, as the next computer they purchased would be incompatible anyway. At that point price and performance were usually the only concerns.
----
In 1962, IBM tried a new approach to designing computers. The plan was to make an entire family of computers that could all run the same software, but with different performances, and at different prices. As users' requirements grew they could move up to larger computers, and still keep all of their investment in programs, data and storage media.
Macedonians, who participated in the Olympics at [[Olympia]], were as follows:
In order to do this they designed a single ''reference computer'' called the '''[[System 360]]''' (or '''S/360'''). The System 360 was a virtual computer, a reference instruction set and capabilities that all machines in the family would support. In order to provide different classes of machines, each computer in the family would use more or less hardware emulation, and more or less [[microprogram]] emulation, to create a machine capable of running the entire System 360 [[instruction set]].
1.[[Alexander I king of Macedonia|King Alexander I]], in the 80th Olympics, in 460 BCE. He run the “Stadion” and was placed very close second.
For instance a low-end machine could include a very simple processor for low cost. However this would require the use of a larger microcode emulator to provide the rest of the instruction set, which would slow it down. A high-end machine would use a much more complex processor that could directly process more of the System 360 design, thus running a much simpler and faster emulator.
2.[[Arhelaos Perdikas king of Macedonia|King Arhelaos Perdikas]], competed in the 93rd Olympics, in 408 BCE and won at Delphi the race of the four-horse chariot.
IBM chose to make the reference [[instruction set]] quite complex, and very capable. This was a conscious choice. Even though the computer was complex, its "[[control store]]" containing the [[microprogram]] would stay relatively small, and could be made with very fast memory. Another important effect was that a single instruction could describe quite a complex sequence of operations. Thus the computers would generally have to fetch fewer instructions from the main memory, which could be made slower, smaller and less expensive for a given combination of speed and price.
3.[[Philip II king of Macedonia|King Philip II]] wree times. In the 106th Olympics, in 356 BCE, he won the race, riding his horse. In the 107th Olympics, in 352 BCE, he won the four-horse chariot race. In the 108th Olympics, in 348 BCE, he was the winner of the two colt chariot.
As the S/360 was to be a successor to both scientific machines like the [[IBM 7090|7090]] and data processing machines like the [[IBM 1401|1401]], it needed a design that could reasonably support all forms of processing. Hence the instruction set was designed to manipulate not just simple binary numbers, but text, scientific floating-point (similar to the numbers used in a calculator), and the [[binary coded decimal]] arithmetic needed by accounting systems.
4.'''Cliton''' run the Stadion in the 113rd Olympics, in 328 BCE.
Almost all following computers included these innovations in some form. This basic set of features is now called a "[[complex instruction set computer]]," or CISC (pronounced "sisk"), a term not invented until many years later.
5.[[Damasias from Amphipolis]] won in the Stadion in the 115th Olympics, in 320 BCE.
In many CISCs, an instruction could access either registers or memory, usually in several different ways.
6.[[Lampos from Philippi]], was proclaimed a winner in the four-horse chariot race in the 119th Olympics, in 304 BCE.
This made the CISCs easier to program, because a programmer could remember just thirty to a hundred instructions, and a set of three to ten [[addressing mode]]s rather than thousands of distinct instructions.
This was called an "[[orthogonal instruction set]]."
The [[PDP-11]] and [[Motorola 68000]] architecture are examples of nearly orthogonal instruction sets.
There was also the ''BUNCH'' (Burroughs, Univac, NCR, CDC, and Honeywell) that competed against IBM at this time though IBM dominated the era with [[S/360]].
7.'''Antigonos''' won in the Stadion race, in the 122nd Olympics, in 292 BCE and in the 123rd Olympics in 288 BCE.
The Burroughs Corporation (which later became Unisys when they merged with Sperry/Univac) offered an alternative to S/360 with their [[Burroughs B5000|B5000]] series machines. The B5000 series [[1961]] had virtual memory, a multi-programming operating system (Master Control Program or MCP), written in [[ALGOL 60]], and the industry's first recursive-descent compilers as early as 1963.
8.'''Seleucos''' won in the field-sports competition in the 128th Olympics in 268 BCE.
=== 1970s: large scale integration ===
9.During the 128th Olympics, in 268 BCE and in the 129th Olympics, in 264 BCE, a woman from Macedonia won the competition. Pausanias mentions that: “…it is said that the race of the two-colt chariot was won by a woman, named '''Velestihi''' from the seashores of Macedonia”.
In the 1960s, the [[Apollo guidance computer]] and [[Minuteman missile]] made the [[integrated circuit]] economical and practical.
Forever the Macedonians will be named Greek, Bulgrarian or Serbian..
and so the land.. Open your eyes, there are 2 million people who believe that they are Macedonians despite the propaganda from 3 countries.
Around 1971, the first calculator and clock chips began to show that very small computers might be possible. The first [[microprocessor]] was the 4004, designed in 1971 for a calculator company, and produced by [[Intel]]. The 4004 is the direct ancestor of the [[Intel 80386]], even now maintaining some code compatibility. Just a few years later, the word size of the 4004 was doubled to form the 8008.
== Relocation ==
As a matter of fact, the relocation of some of the article suggested by [[User:Vergina]] is not such a bad idea. Those parts relocated by Vergina actually fir much better the article on FYROM than that of Macedonia
By the mid-1970s, the use of integrated circuits in computers was commonplace. The whole decade consists of upheavals caused by the shrinking price of transistors.
: Not exactly, a main country page must not have tens of paragraphs of history. Most of it would fit on [[History of the Republic of Macedonia]] but it needs to be integrated, not just evacuated in order to censor, which is what Vergina did.
: And in any case, fact remains that this part of Macedonia is what determined the history of the region in the last fifteen (or fifty) years and it definitely needs ''some'' amount of mention on the main region page. --[[User:Joy|Joy <small><small>[shallot]</small></small>]] 18:01, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
::I personally don't care where it is. It just seemed as a good idea - at least yesterday [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]. (I seem to have forgotten to sign yesterday)
::On the contrary I care, and I would object moving the part relating to ancient Macedonians participating in the Olympics (if I've understood correctly and that's what we're talking about) in [[History of the Republic of Macedonia]], which starts in the 20th century. Prior to that, there's the history of Macedonian Slavs, but moving this to such an article would directly associate the ancient Macedonians with the Macedonian Slavs. [[User:Etz Haim|Etz Haim]] 16:58, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
:::Etz.Haim, you don't know what you're talking about. The whole question regards the history of FYROM after 1945 AD and as far as I can remember there were no ancient Olympics after that date but if you insist...[[User:VMORO|VMORO]]
:::::You have to have on mind my friend: I have a grandfather who is born in the 1920s. That is quite before the 1945th. And he feels all MACEDONIAN. Actually, if you were here with us now, he would cut your lying tongue off (his words, not mine) [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 13:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
::::VMORO, thanks for being so kind to point this out to me. It's always nice to have such a gifted person around, whose memories span centuries and that's so willing to assist. [[User:Etz Haim|Etz Haim]] 00:52, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
::::: Why is it that ChrisO moved so swiftly to remove from the article evidence of Macedonians having participated in the Olympics, rather than move it to a more appropriate place in the article? And why did he not at the same time remove the claims to the contrary? Because it would not support the revisionist POV and that would not be convenient to the VMRO and FYROM propaganda machine. Gentlemen. That is '''not NPOV'''. One of two things will happen here: Either
:::::# We will all work together to tell people that there are multiple points of view on the history of Macedonia and present '''ALL''' of the facts for the reader to make up their own mind - or
:::::# This article must be removed from here. '''I repeat myself and take this seriously: I WILL NOT ALLOW THIS TO BECOME A PROPAGANDA ARTICLE FOR FYROM AND VMRO.'''
:::::I recommend that the VMRO agent and ChrisO and everyone else cease and desist from wholesale removals of mine or others' contributions which oppose the VMRO/FYROM '''propaganda POV''' and start to collaborate or this will become a permanent war of removals and reversions. I will take this to the full extent of the procedures available within Wikipedia and beyond if necessary. [[User:Philaleth|Philaleth]] 12:28, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
It became possible to put an entire CPU on a single printed circuit board. The result was that minicomputers, usually with 16-bit words, and 4k to 64K of memory, came to be commonplace.
==Macedonia around 450 before Christ==
[[Macedonia]]=Macedonia in Greece+ [[Bitola]] ([[FYROM]])
CISCs were believed to be the most powerful types of computers, because their microcode was small and could be stored in very high-speed memory. The CISC architecture also addressed the "semantic gap" as it was perceived at the time. This was a defined distance between the machine language, and the higher level language people used to program a machine. It was felt that compilers could do a better job with a richer instruction set.
FYROMs citys ,[[Ohrid]],[[Prilep]],[[Strumica]],[[Kicevo]],
[[Tito Veles]],[[Stip]],[[Gostivar]],[[Tetovo]],[[Skopje]],[[Kumanovo]] are not [[Macedonia]]!
The borders of Macedonia are to see clear.
Custom CISCs were commonly constructed using "bit slice" computer logic such as the AMD 2900 chips, with custom microcode. A bit slice component is a piece of an [[ALU]], register file or microsequencer. Most bit-slice integrated circuits were 4-bits wide.
See Map:http://www.freeeliterature.com/AtripThroughTime/Files%20and%20Maps/athenian_empire_450.jpg
By the early 1970s, the [[PDP-11]] was developed, arguably the most advanced small computer of its day. Almost immediately, wider-word CISCs were introduced, the 32-bit [[VAX]] and 36-bit [[PDP-10]].
[[User:Vergina|Vergina]] 16:17, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Also, to control a cruise missile, Intel developed a more-capable version of its 8008 microprocessor, the 8080.
== not NPOV ==
IBM continued to make large, fast computers. However the definition of large and fast now meant more than a megabyte of RAM, clock speeds near one megahertz [http://www.hometoys.com/mentors/caswell/sep00/trends01.htm][http://research.microsoft.com/users/GBell/Computer_Structures_Principles_and_Examples/csp0727.htm], and tens of megabytes of disk drives.
This article clearly cannot be considered to be NPOV. There are too many facts ommitted and too much spin and propaganda such that it constitutes a revision of the history of the region as of the rule of Tito in Yugoslavia. His attempt to occupy Greek territories by creating a Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and by manufacturing a "Macedonian" language out of Bulgarian was intitially supported by the Soviet Union and is well documented. Many of the claims made in this article to appear as "history" stem from those revisions. This article will have to remain marked as '''non-NPOV''' until such time as it presents facts and not propaganda. In the least, it will have to present two points of view: The FYROM propaganda and the Greek and Bulgarian positions that FYROM has co-opted historical and cultural figures and adopted the revisionist history that was produced by Tito's "scholars."
Until this article meets NPOV standards I will insist that it remains marked as NPOV and I will recommend to VMORO to refrain from removing the mark.
:Philaleth, what you say is true but it has been included in the article - you can clearly see it in the "Controversy" sections and in "Macedonia after 1945" (and in fact I have contributed to writing some of the things). However, you don't seem to understand that the language and the style that you want to use DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE CRITERIA SET BEFORE ANY INDEPENDENT SOURCE OF INFORMATION. Yours [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] (not VMRO)
::[[User:Philaleth|Philaleth]] 22:32, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
::Dear VMRO (pun intended),
::According to various tests my IQ is in the genius range. However I fail to understand your CAPITALIZED sentence. Independent sources of information don't set criteria for language and style. They provide information. Period. Now let's assume that you meant that the language I propose cannot be supported by any independent source of information: For your statement to have any merit, we would have to establish a clear definition of "independent source of information" and when it comes to history ''there is no such thing.'' So whereas your statement would be true, it would also be a truism, and therefore pointless (other than as a personal attack on me by you).
::The search for the truth is no simple endeavour. It requires a complex process of painstakinigly accumulating information and "grading" the information according to the source, the period, the intended audience and a million other contextual parameters. Then it's necessary to establish if any of the information can be cross-checked and verified by all sources, if any of it can be shown irrefutably to be fallacious and the remainder of it has to be presented carefully, with proper context and its weight of probability of veracity. When I characterize the contents of this article as '''"swill"''' it is because I can prove, logically and verifiably, that it is. There is no way that you can possibly present some point of view (that did not exist until Tito was ordered by the USSR to expand to the Mediterranean and they agreed that the best way to lay the foundation for that is to '''manufacture''' a history, a language, a peoples and a culture that would allow for them to proceed with claims to Thessaloniki) and not present the opposite, which is documented as of 3,000 years ago by multiple, verifiable sources (whose context at the time is perfectly known and therefore appropriate weighing can be applied.) Case in point: The article contained some claims that Macedonians were not included in the Olympics. This claim cannot be shown to have existed before 600AD. I doubt it can be verifiably shown to have existed pre-Tito and the invention of Yugoslav Macedonia. However it is prominently displayed in Wikipedia as a fact. On the other hand, attempts to include information that undermines that claim, by ancient sources, verifiable (some in the original to this date!) have been maniacly opposed by you and a couple of others. It is blatantly clear that Wikipedia is a bunch of '''swill''' at the mercy of demagogues and charlatans and I just don't have the time or the inclination to clean up this clusterfuck. Have at it. In the end, by its nature, the whole thing is going to unravel into some sort of prolonged internal war between the incompatible agglomeration of tribes that are pretending to be "Macedonians" - so who gives a sh... ''(BTW VMORO was first established in 1893 under the name of Bulgarian Macedono-Odrin Revolutionary Committee and later renamed VMORO and then to VMRO (aka IMRO). Update your alias and stop hiding behind your finger.)''
IBM's System 370 was a version of the 360 tweaked to run virtual computing environments. The [[VM (Operating system) |virtual computer]] was developed in order to reduce the possibility of an unrecoverable software failure.
::::Dear Philareth,
::::you have been very sweet today. I liked especially the remark about the Bulgarian Macedono-Odrinski Revolutionary Committee after which I have actually named my profile. You can find more about the history of the name of IMRO (VMRO) at [[IMRO]] - as a result of the last edit I made a couple of days ago.
::::As for the rest: I cannot figure out yet as to why you insist on the version that the ancient Macedonians originally were Greek. This is a position, which is almost impossible to defend as all evidence points that they were probably of Thracian/Illyrian stock and were gradually Hellenized with time. But pretty much everyone here agrees that by the 4th cent. BC the ancient Macedonians were completely Hellenized (=they had become Greeks). So what's the problem really??? If you drop your over-nationalistic claims (which are not supported by anyone outside Greece), we can actually have quite a nice co-operation and continue the struggle against the FYROMian thieves of history together (which can actually make things a lot easier). Your [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]
The Burroughs B5000/B6000/B7000 series reached its largest market share. It was a stack computer programmed in a dialect of Algol. It used 64-bit fixed-point arithmetic, rather than floating-point.
==Discussion and Blocking==
I increasingly start to think that the only way this article has any future is if it is put for discussion and possibly blocked for further editing. I appeal to all sane people who have contributed to writing it to take joint measures in that direction. ~~[[VMORO]]
All these different developments competed madly for marketshare.
==The region took its name from the inhabitants, the Macedonians or ''Makednoi''==
=== Early 1980s: the lessons of RISC ===
I,56. By these lines when they came to him Croesus was pleased more than by all the rest, for he supposed that a mule would never be ruler of the Medes instead of a man, and accordingly that he himself and his heirs would never cease from their rule. Then after this he gave thought to inquire which people of the [[Greek people|Hellenes]] he should esteem the most powerful and gain over to himself as friends. And inquiring he found that the Lacedemonians and the Athenians had the pre-eminence, the first of the Dorian and the others of the Ionian race. For these were the most eminent races in ancient time, the second being a Pelasgian and the first a Hellenic race: and the one never migrated from its place in any direction, while the other was very exceedingly given to wanderings; for in the reign of Deucalion this race dwelt in Pthiotis, and in the time of Doros the son of Hellen in the land lying below Ossa and Olympos, which is called Histiaiotis; and when it was driven from Histiaiotis by the sons of Cadmos, it dwelt in Pindos and was called [[Makednoi|Makednian]]; and thence it moved afterwards to Dryopis, and from Dryopis it came finally to Peloponnesus, and began to be called [[Dorian]].
See [[Herodot I,56]]
http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_text_herodotus_1.htm
In the early [[1980s]], researchers at [[UC Berkeley]] and [[IBM]] both discovered that most computer language compilers and interpreters used only a small subset of the instructions of a [[CISC]]. Much of the power of the CPU was simply being ignored in real-world use. They realized that by making the computer simpler and less orthogonal, they could make it faster and less expensive at the same time.
[[User:Vergina|Vergina]] 12:50, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
At the same time, CPUs were growing faster in relation to the memory they addressed. Designers also experimented with using large sets of internal registers. The idea was to [[cache]] intermediate results in the registers under the control of the compiler.
:Mythology is not worth much in the field of facts, Vergina [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]
This also reduced the number of [[addressing mode]]s and orthogonality.
The computer designs based on this theory were called [[Reduced Instruction Set Computer]]s, or RISC. RISCs generally had larger numbers of registers, accessed by simpler instructions, with a few instructions specifically to load and store data to memory. The result was a very simple core CPU running at very high speed, supporting the exact sorts of operations the compilers were using anyway.
A common variation on the RISC design employs the [[Harvard architecture]], as opposed to the [[Von Neumann architecture|Von Neumann]] or Stored Program architecture common to most other designs. In a Harvard Architecture machine, the program and data occupy separate memory devices and can be accessed simultaneously. In Von Neumann machines the data and programs are mixed in a single memory device, requiring sequential accessing which produces the so-called "Von Neumann bottleneck."
One downside to the RISC design has been that the programs that run on them tend to be larger. This is because [[compiler]]s have to generate longer sequences of the simpler instructions to accomplish the same results. Since these instructions need to be loaded from memory anyway, the larger code size offsets some of the RISC design's fast memory handling.
==Demographics==
Recently, engineers have found ways to compress the reduced instruction sets so they fit in even smaller memory systems than CISCs. Examples of such compression schemes include [[ARM architecture|the ARM]]'s "Thumb" instruction set. In applications that do not need to run older binary software, compressed RISCs are coming to dominate sales.
Kapnisma - Who wrote ''The question of whether the ancient Macedonians were in fact Greek is controversial, as the ancient Greeks themselves explicitly regarded the Macedonians as non-Greek barbarians'' ?
What are you talking about?Are you serious?The only one who said Macedonians were barbarians was Demosthenes on his speeches Philippic Orations against Philip.Isocrates,Polybius,Strabo,Arrian,Pausanias,Plutarch wrote quotes in which the say that Macedonians were greeks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Do you want me to write down what they have said?
Another approach to RISCs was the "[[niladic]]" or "zero-address" instruction set. This approach realized that the majority of space in an instruction was to identify the operands of the instruction. These machines placed the operands on a push-down (last-in, first out) [[stack (computing)|stack]]. The instruction set was supplemented with a few instructions to fetch and store memory. Most used simple caching to provide extremely fast RISC machines, with very compact code. Another benefit was that the interrupt latencies were extremely small, smaller than most CISC machines (a rare trait in RISC machines). The first zero-address computer was developed by [[Chuck Moore|Charles Moore]]. It placed six 5-bit instructions in a 32-bit word, and was a precursor to [[VLIW]] design (see below: 1990 to Today).
Kapnisma '''Sources'''
Commercial variants were mostly characterized as "[[FORTH]]" machines, and probably failed because that language became unpopular. Also, the machines were developed by defense contractors at exactly the time that the cold war ended. Loss of funding may have broken up the development teams before the companies could perform adequate commercial marketing.
'''Herodotus (V 22)'''
RISC chips now dominate the market for 32-bit embedded systems. Smaller RISC chips are even becoming common in the cost-sensitive 8-bit embedded-system market. The main market for RISC CPUs has been systems that require low power or small size.
'''Herodotus I, 56'''
Even some CISC processors (based on architectures that were created before RISC became dominant) translate instructions internally into a RISC-like instruction set. These CISC chips include newer [[X86|x86]] and [[VAX]] models.
'''Herodotus VIII-43'''
These numbers may surprise many, because the "market" is perceived to be desktop computers. With Intel x86 designs dominating the vast majority of all desktop sales, RISC is found only in the [[Apple Computer|Apple]] desktop computer lines. However, desktop computers are only a tiny fraction of the computers now sold. Most people own more computers in embedded systems in their car and house than on their desks.
'''Herodotus VIII,136-138'''
=== Mid-1980s to today: exploiting instruction level parallelism ===
'''Polyvios (VII 11,4, V 103,9, XVIII, XXXiV 7,13 , VII 9,1 IX 37,7)''' :
In the mid-to-late 1980s, designers began using a technique known as '''[[instruction pipelining]]''', in which the processor works on multiple instructions in different stages of completion. For example, the processor may be retrieving the operands for the next instruction while calculating the result of the current one. Modern CPUs may use over a dozen such stages.
'''Plutarchos(Flam. XI)'''
A similar idea, introduced only a few years later, was to execute multiple instructions in parallel on separate arithmetic-logic units ([[ALU]]s). Instead of operating on only one instruction at a time, the CPU will look for several similar instructions that are not dependent on each other, and execute them in parallel. This approach is known as [[superscalar]] processor design.
'''Isocrates. Philip. 154'''
Such techniques are limited by the degree of [[instruction level parallelism]] (ILP), the number of non-dependent instructions in the program code. Some programs are able to run very well on superscalar processors due to their inherent high ILP, notably graphics. However more general problems do not have such high ILP, thus making the achievable speedups due to these techniques to be lower.
== Article starting to get bigger, especially the history section ==
Branching is one major culprit. For example, the program might add two numbers and branch to a different code segment if the number is bigger than a third number. In this case even if the branch operation is sent to the second ALU for processing, it still must wait for the results from the addition. It thus runs no faster than if there were only one ALU. The most common solution for this type of problem is to use a type of [[branch prediction]].
Hi. I've done some formatting of the history section. Mostly adding sections to make it easier to follow chronologically, and also added some info (included sources as comments in the text). I'm not completely sure if any of it is disputed, if it is, please do add opposing beliefs in order to keep it NPOV, but please don't remove anything preferably as I have included sources. At some point I suspect the article may start to get >32Kb, so when that happens, I'll split the history section off into a "history of Macedonia" article. Regards, --[[User:Rebroad|Rebroad]] 23:44, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
To further the efficiency of multiple functional units which are available in superscalar designs, operand register dependencies was found to be another limiting factor. To minimize these dependencies, [[out-of-order execution]] of instructions was introduced. In such a scheme, the instruction results which complete out-of-order must be re-ordered in program order by the processor for the program to be restartable after an exception. ''Out-of-Order'' execution was the main advancement of the computer industry during the [[1990s]].
:yes...don't forget to leave a history summary behind. This article is lacking a geography section, for anyone interested--[[User:Jiang|Jia]][[User talk:Jiang|ng]] 01:02, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
A similar concept is [[speculative execution]], where instructions from both sides of a branch are executed at the same time, and the results of one side or the other are thrown out once the branch answer is known.
These advances, which were originally developed from research for RISC-style designs, allow modern CISC processors to execute twelve or more instructions per clock cycle, when traditional CISC designs could take twelve or more cycles to execute just one instruction.
Hi! I must stress at this point, that the majority of the sources I have used have been Greek. I am aware that Greek's and ROM disagree on which side is speaking propaganda (at least it looks that way from what I have read so far). I will be back in a few days to include info from ROM sources. In case you are interested, I will be making select choices from these web sites:
* Misc
** [http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/see/fyrom/]
* Biased against Greece:
** [http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/ConciseMacedonia/MacedoniansNotGreeks.html]
** [http://www.makedonija.info/info.html#Name]
** [http://www.geocities.com/macedonian_pridemk/glavna.html] (Macedonians wanting to be independant)
** [http://www.geocities.com/macedonian_pridemk/aleksmk.html] (In what language is this writing on the stone?)
** [http://www.macedonian-heritage.gr/Images/Maps/Borders_Symbols_Stability/map4.gif] (Some once published territorial plans?)
* Seems fairly neutrally written (but different conclusions reached):
** [http://faq.macedonia.org/history/badian.html]
** ]http://www.macedonian-empire.cjb.net/] (Saying Macedonia was not Greek)
** [http://www.makedonija.info/agreement.html] [http://www.hri.org/docs/fyrom/95-27866.html] (UN agreement between Greece and "FYROM")
** [http://www.patrides.com/may04/enmartis.htm] (Saying Macedonia was Greek)
* Pro-Greek:
** [http://www.cc.ece.ntua.gr/~conster/English/PageData/the_issue.htm]]
The resulting instruction scheduling logic of these processors is large, complex and difficult to verify. Furthermore, the higher complexity requires more transistors, increasing power consumption and heat. In this respect RISC is superior because the instructions are simpler, have less interdependence and make superscalar implementations easier. However, as Intel has demonstrated, the concepts can be applied to a CISC design, given enough time and money.
Hope this gives you an idea of some proposed things to come. I will try to keep it as NPOV as possible! Regards, --[[User:Rebroad|Rebroad]] 10:36, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
:Historical note: Some of these techniques (e.g. pipelining) were originally developed in the late [[1950s]] by [[International Business Machines|IBM]] on their [[IBM 7030|Stretch]] mainframe computer.
== The language of Macedon ==
=== 1990 to today: looking forward ===
The article in its current state includes a distorting POV, overemphasizing in the linguistic differences between the Macedonians and some of the other Greeks. The ancient Macedonians spoke [[Doric Greek]], the same dialect the Spartans used to speak. That was somewhat different from the [[Attic Greek]] language of Athens, but still Greek and still intelligible by the rest of the Greeks. Furthermore, in the statement:
====VLIW and EPIC====
:''"The Hellenistic character of Macedon grew over the next century until, under the rule of Philip II of Macedon, Macedon extended its power in the 4th century BC over the rest of northern Greece."''
The instruction scheduling logic that makes a superscalar processor is just boolean logic. In the early 1990s, a significant innovation was to realize that the coordination of a multiple-ALU computer could be moved into the [[compiler]], the software that translates a programmer's instructions into machine-level instructions.
the word [[Hellenistic]] is an anachronism, misplaced in time and space. [[User:Etz Haim|Etz Haim]] 08:57, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
This type of computer is called a '''[[very long instruction word]]''' (VLIW) computer.
Statically scheduling the instructions in the compiler (as opposed to letting the processor do the scheduling dynamically) has many practical advantages over doing so in the CPU.
I agree, linguists agry that what is left to us from ancient quotations about macedonian language(about 700 words) is greek, not to mention personal names, names of gods,etc.So, I think that the phrase
''King Alexander I of Macedon (died 450 BC) was the first Macedonian king to play a significant role in Greek politics, promoting the adoption of the Greek language and culture.'',
should be changed into
''King Alexander I of Macedon (died 450 BC) was the first Macedonian king to play a significant role in Greek politics, while others -especially king Archelaos (died 399 BC), founder of Pella- promoted the adoption of the Attic dialect and culture.''[[User:Kapnisma|Kapnisma]] 10:45, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Oddly, speed is not one of them. With enough transistors, the CPU could do everything at once. However all those transistors make the chip larger, and therefore more expensive. The transistors also use power, which means that they generate heat that must be removed. The heat also makes the design less reliable.
---
==Nonsense etymology?==
''"According to ancient Greek mythology, Makedon was the name of the tribeleader of the Makedones, that was the part of the protohellenic tribe of Makednoi that spread throughout the area of Western, Southern and Central Macedonia. The name Makedon comes from the name Makednos which derives from the Greek word Makos (that is the word Mikos in the doric dialect) meaning length. The Makedones (or Macedonians) were regarded as tall people, and that's why they acquired that name."'' This is not up to Wikipedia standards. --[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 13:11, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
:The etymological analysis is fine (maybe the phrasing quality is lacking). Makedon (Gr. Μακεδον), Makedonia (Gr. Μακεδονια) derives from '''makos''' or '''makeos''' (Gr. Μακος or Mακιος) which is the Doric type of '''mikos''' or '''mekos''' (Gr. Μηκος), meaning '''length'''. Makedanos or Makednos, in Doric, is the adjective meaning of " ''the long''"," ''the tall'' "; hence the characterization of the ancient 'Makedons - Makedonians' as the ''tall people'' or the ''highlanders'' (see: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Macedonia). Actually, the word 'people' should not be part of the translation. Later Romans -although retaining the letter 'k' in the Latin alphabet- transcribed the Greek letter "'''K'''" ('''kappa'''-καππα) as "'''C'''", hence the modern spelling of the words 'Macedon' , 'Macedonia', 'Macedonian' etc.
:It's quite surprising and alarming that you tag as "nonsense", such a widely (and easily) certifiable/verifiable case, from any random text book-etymologicon. [[User:Ninio|Ninio]] 05:34, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Since compiling happens only once on the developer's machine, the control logic is "canned" in the final realization of the program. This means that it consumes no transistors, and no power, and therefore is free, and generates no heat.
The resulting CPU is simpler, and runs at least as fast as if the scheduling were in the CPU.
==Read this==
There were several unsuccessful attempts to commercialize VLIW. The basic problem is that a VLIW computer does not scale to different price and performance points, as a dynamically scheduled computer can.
My intention is not to bring back the old debate whether Macedonias where Greeks or not, but to
clear up things, as I can.
As anyone can see from the article [[Macedonians]], it's talk page and history sources above all, two are the main views. The one regards them as isolated Greeks, speaking a doric dialect and the other one as a mixed tribe of Greeks, Thracians and Illyrians, speaking a form of Greek. Those views are being debated from the 19th century when the German historian Droysen first called the period from Alexander till the rise of Rome, Hellenistic. There is also an other view, that Macedonians where a separate from Greeks tribe, speaking a separate ''Macedonian'' (sic) language, which is supported by FYROM historians. This view was created during and after WW II when Tito created the Socialist Republic of Macedonia in the territoty of Yugoslavia for the well known reasons. (to detract Macedonian-Slavs from the Bulgarian influence and to claim Greek and Bulgarian areas. Which one approaches historical truth better has been very well discussed and there is no need to repeate again and again.
Also, VLIW computers optimise for throughput, not low latency, so they were not attractive to the engineers designing controllers and other computers embedded in machinery. The [[embedded system]]s markets had often pioneered other computer improvements by providing a large market that did not care about compatibility with older software.
Consequently, when the editors are reffering to Macedonian-Slavs as ''Macedonians'' and to their state as ''Macedonia'' this is not only wrong from historical aspect, but also dangerous.
Dangerous, because it seems like you are acclaiming terittorial claims against Greece and that you are falscificating history of Greece. No one denies the right of the Macedonian-Slavs to call themselves and their state as they wish, but they must respect others history and culture.
In January [[2000]], a company called [[Transmeta]] took the interesting
So, it's wrong to call this state ''Republic of Macedonia'' instead of former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia the same time that ALL international organisations are accepting it and negotiations in UN continue.
step of placing a compiler in the central processing unit, and making the compiler translate from a reference byte code (in their case, [[x86]] instructions) to an internal VLIW instruction set. This approach
combines the hardware simplicity, low power and speed of VLIW RISC with
the compact main memory system and software reverse-compatibility provided
by popular CISC.
[[Intel]] released a chip, called the [[Itanium]], based on what they call an [[Explicitly Parallel Instruction Computing]] (EPIC) design. This design supposedly provides the VLIW advantage of increased instruction throughput. However, it avoids some of the issues of scaling and complexity, by explicitly providing in each "bundle" of instructions information concerning their dependencies. This information is calculated by the compiler, as it would be in a VLIW design. The early versions are also backward-compatible with current [[x86]] software by means of an on-chip [[emulation]] mode. Integer performance has been disappointing as have sales in volume markets.
It's wrong and dangerous to call Macedonian-Slavs, ''Macedonians''.If you do so, then the inhabitans of Macedonia (in Greece, like me) how are they going to call themselves? And if tommorow an other state decides to be called ''Attica'', does this mean the Greeks in Attica will lost their right to be called Athenaeans?
====Multi-threading====
It's wrong, offensive and aggravating to call Greek part of Macedonia ''Aegean Macedonia'' because it seems like modern Greeks are not the heirs of its history and culture.
Also, we may soon see multi-threaded CPUs. Current designs work best when the computer is running only a single program, however nearly all modern [[operating system]]s allow the user to run multiple programs at the same time. For the CPU to change over and do work on another program requires expensive [[context switching]]. In contrast, a multi-threaded CPU could handle instructions from multiple programs at once.
It's wrong in this article to exist a paragrath entitled ''Republic of Macedonia and the Yugoslav Wars'', this is history of FYROM only, not of the whole Macedonia region.If this continues it means you are accepting what I mentioned above. I will not move it right now because I want to hear other opinions first. [[User:Kapnisma|Kapnisma]] 15:49, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
To do this, such CPUs include several sets of registers. When a context switch occurs, the contents of the "working registers" are simply copied into one of a set of registers for this purpose.
:::I agree with pretty much everything you said, except with one thing: It is as wrong to call these people "Macedonian Slavs", as it is to call them "Macedonians". I (as well as some 800,000 people in Bulgaria) am also technically a "Macedonian Slav". I am a Slav from Macedonia but this does not mean in the slightest degree that I have anything to do with their abominable ideology and their stolen history. It is extremely offensive to me, as well as to the other 800,000 Bulgarians of Macedonian descent to call the FYROMians "Macedonian Slavs". [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]
Such designs often include thousands of registers instead of hundreds as in a typical design. On the downside, registers tend to be somewhat expensive in chip space needed to implement them. This chip space might otherwise be used for some other purpose.
I totally agree that the so called Macedonians (the inhabitants of FYROM) have nothing in common with the macedonians of Alexander the Great (who are undoubtedly a greek tribe) so it is not correct to make any comparison between modern greeks and modern macedonians. All facts and documentary point out that macedonian slavs (modern macedonians = slavs + albanians)are bulgarian descendants. Modern Macedonian nation is artifitially created by the former legendary leader of Yugoslavia - Tito. By giving the Slavs in the geografical region of Macedonia their own national identity he strived to deprive them from their real origin - Bulgaria.
====Reconfigurable logic====
Another track of development is to combine reconfigurable logic with a general-purpose CPU. In this scheme, a special computer language compiles fast-running subroutines into a bit-mask to configure the logic. Slower, or less-critical parts of the program can be run by sharing their time on the CPU. This process has the capability to create devices such as software [[radio]]s, by using digital signal processing to perform functions usually performed by analog [[electronics]].
====Public ___domain processors====
:The easy part: I acknowledge myself that the section titled ''"Republic of Macedonia and the Yugoslav Wars"'' is more relevant to the [[History of the Republic of Macedonia]], an article that seems somehow neglected, perhaps in favor of this one. It should be moved.
As the lines between hardware and software increasingly blur due to progress in design methodology and availability of chips such as [[FPGA]]s and cheaper production processes, even [[open source hardware]] has begun to appear. Loosely-knit communities like [[OpenCores]] have recently announced completely open CPU architectures such as the [[OpenRISC]] which can be readily implemented on FPGAs or in custom produced chips, by anyone, without paying license fees.
:The hard part: As I've said before, a nation, in its modern sense and viewed through the nation-state perspective, is more of a social construct than a legacy of the values it claims to represent. Many Greeks, unaware of this, view Greek history as a straight line spanning 3000 years, and think that the Greek nation and the Greek national identity have been unaltered through millenia. These common misconceptions, although from an alternative point of view, trouble the minds of the people of the Republic of Macedonia too.
====High end processor economics====
:When it comes to the "Hellenic identity", it was certainly something very vague during the era of the Greek city-states. Common language and common religion were there, but these weren't enough, as the social construct hadn't been established. The Persian wars were probably the first occurence of a Hellenic national identity, comparable to that of a modern nation, as the Greeks were united against someone perceived to be a common enemy by the majority. This larval national concept matured later with Philip's and Alexander's campaigns and pan-Hellenic advocacy, who were the ones to "hellenize" the Greek city-states, and not vice versa. [[User:Etz Haim|Etz Haim]] 17:03, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Developing new, high-end CPUs is a '''very''' expensive proposition. Both the logical complexity (needing very large logic design and logic verification teams and simulation farms with perhaps thousands of computers) and the high operating frequencies (needing large circuit design teams and access to the state-of-the-art fabrication process) account for the high cost of design for this type of chip. The design cost of a high-end CPU will be on the order of US $100 million. Since the design of such high-end chips nominally take about five years to complete, to stay competitive a company has to fund at least two of these large design teams to release products at the rate of 2.5 years per product generation. Only the personal computer mass market (with production rates in the hundreds of millions, producing billions of dollars in revenue) can support such economics. As of 2004, only four companies are actively designing and fabricating state of the art general purpose computing CPU chips: [[Intel]], [[AMD]], [[IBM]] and [[Fujitsu]]. [[Motorola]] has spun off its semiconductor division as [[Freescale]] as that division was dragging down profit margins for the rest of the company. [[Texas Instruments]], [[TSMC]] and [[Toshiba]] are a few examples of a companies doing manufacturing for another company's CPU chip design.
== Embedded design ==
As I have said above I decided to move this section, because it presents the history not of the whole Macedonia region, but only FYROM history.
The majority of computer systems in use today are embedded in other machinery, such as telephones, clocks, appliances, vehicles, and infrastructure. An [[embedded system]] usually has minimal requirements for memory and program length and may require simple but unusual input/output systems. For example, most embedded systems lack keyboards, screens, disks, printers, or other recognizable I/O devices of a personal computer. They may control electric motors, relays or voltages, and reed switches, variable resistors or other electronic devices. Often, the only I/O device readable by a human is a single light-emitting diode, and severe cost or power constraints can even eliminate that.
[[User:Kapnisma|Kapnisma]] 00:39, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
In contrast to general-purpose computers, embedded systems often seek to minimize [[interrupt latency]] over instruction throughput.
== Stuff deleted with no reason given? ==
When an electronic device causes an interrupt, the intermediate results, the registers, have to be saved before the software responsible for handling the interrupt can run, and then must be put back after it is finished. If there are more registers, this saving and restoring process takes more time, increasing the latency.
Please could someone provide an explanation why some content was removed? Thanks, --[[User:Rebroad|Rebroad]] 11:29, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Low-latency CPUs generally have relatively few registers in their central processing units, or they have "shadow registers" that are only used by the interrupt software.
# What FYROM theorists are reported to believe: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Macedonia&diff=8739877&oldid=8739493 - I've put this back (the source is mentioned). Although what is claimed may not be fact, it is the fact that it is claimed that is important to the article, isn't it?
# http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Macedonia&diff=8783064&oldid=8748464 - All these changes have really confused me! I can't tell what is where any more! :-S
# Treaties: of Neuilly, of Trianon, of Sevres. Were these not useful additions to the article?
=== VMOROOther changesdesign issues ===
<!-- [[virtual memory]] moved to [[Computer architecture]] -->
When I first saw all the changes I was a little taken aback as it looked like a lot of stuff had been reverted, but after reading through a lot of it, most of my contributions seem to still be there but rephrased in places, so thanks to VMORO for your efforts there. I did kinda prefer the maps I'd uploaded showing the before and after 1913 maps, but certainly the now current map has some extra info. My only gripe would be the heading changes - I think it helps to have the dates in the titles, making it easier for people to see where to insert any additional information. A minor point though, I'm sure. --[[User:Rebroad|Rebroad]] 12:15, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
One interesting near-term possibility would be to eliminate the bus. Modern vertical [[laser diode]]s enable this change. In theory, an optical computer's components could directly connect through a holographic or phased open-air switching system. This would provide a large increase in effective speed and design flexibility, and a large reduction in cost. Since a computer's connectors are also its most likely failure point, a busless system might be more reliable, as well.
Another farther-term possibility is to use light instead of electricity for the digital logic itself.
*The reason why I removed most of the stuff regarding the opinion of FYROM historians:
In theory, this could run about 30% faster and use less power, as well as permit a direct interface with quantum computational devices.
1. It is not supported internationally, all evidence is against their "theories". But the more important reason is that:
The chief problem with this approach is that for the foreseeable future, electronic devices are faster, smaller (i.e. cheaper) and more reliable.
2. You had constructed the text as a dialogue in which you first gave the opinion of FYROM and then the official Greek position proving that the FYROM position was wrong. It is certainly not to the benefit of the readers if the article is written from the viewpoint of the controversy of FYROM and Greece. And why write something and then deny it right away in the first place???
An important theoretical problem is that electronic computational elements are already smaller than some wavelengths of light, and therefore even wave-guide based optical logic may be uneconomic compared to electronic logic.
*The timelines you give are not especially exact. The first one is ok but it is really difficlut for me to connect the division of Macedonia which basically happened in 1913 with a period of almost 60 years. And with the numbers we get two "holes" - between 146BC and 395AD and from the 15th to the 19th century.
We can therefore expect the majority of development to focus on electronics, no matter how unfair it might seem.
*Why are the three treaties mentioned in the article when none of them really concerns Macedonia??? Macedonia was divided effectively in 1913, the changes after WWI were all but cosmetic... The previous information about the population movements in the 1920 was quite useful - however, if you manage to isolate only the data which regards Macedonia. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]
See also [[optical computing]].
Yet another possibility is the "clockless CPU" (asynchronous CPU). Unlike conventional processors, clockless processors have no central clock to coordinate the progress of data through the pipeline.
Instead, stages of the CPU are coordinated using logic devices called "pipe line controls" or "FIFO sequencers." Basically, the pipeline controller clocks the next stage of logic when the existing stage is complete. In this way, a central clock is unnecessary. There are two advantages to clockless CPUs over clocked CPUs:
* components can run at different speeds in the clockless CPU. In a clocked CPU, no component can run faster than the clock rate.
* In a clocked CPU, the clock can go no faster than the worst-case performance of the slowest stage. In a clockless CPU, when a stage finishes quicker than normal, the next stage can immediately take the results rather than waiting for the next clock tick. A stage might finish quicker than normal because of the particular data inputs (multiplication can be very fast if it is multiplying by 0 or 1), or because it is running at a higher voltage or lower temperature than normal.
Two examples of asynchronous CPUs are the [[ARM_architecture|ARM]]-implementing [[AMULET_microprocessor|AMULET]] and the asynchronous implementation of [[MIPS_architecture|MIPS]] R3000, dubbed [http://www.async.caltech.edu/mips.html MiniMIPS].
Actually, the first division of Macedonia was made with the Berlin Treaty of 1878! Vladko
The biggest disadvantage of the clockless CPU is that most CPU design tools assume a clocked CPU, so making a clockless CPU involves modifying the design tools to handle clockless logic and doing extra testing to ensure the design avoids [[Metastability in electronics|metastable]] problems. For example, the group that designs the aforementioned AMULET developed a tool called [http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/apt/projects/tools/lard/ LARD] to cope with the complex design of AMULET3.
==Design concepts==
VMORO, you have acknowledged that these theories exist. Although most evidence may be against them, my worry is that many people will have heard of them, and will wonder why there is no mention of them in the article. If there is evidence (or lack of evidence) either way - I think the opportunity to mention this evidence (or lack of) should certainly be mentioned in the article - otherwise the article is in no way complete. We should be reporting fact. It is a fact that these theories exist, so their existence should be mentioned, shouldn't it? --[[User:Rebroad|Rebroad]] 20:33, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
In general, all processors, micro or otherwise, run the same sort of task over and over:
#read an instruction and decode it
== "rvt Greek vandalist act" ==
#find any associated data that is needed to process the instruction
#process the instruction
#write the results out
Complicating this simple-looking series of events is the fact that [[main memory]] has always been slower than the processor itself. Step (2) often introduces a lengthy (in CPU terms) delay while the data arrives over the [[computer bus]]. A considerable amount of research has been put into designs that avoid these delays as much as possible. This often requires complex circuitry and was at one time found only on hand-wired [[supercomputer]] designs. However, as the manufacturing processes have improved, they have become a common feature of almost all designs.
This is VMORO's edit summary as he reverts an anonymous edit. See here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Macedonia&oldid=9458034] how much of a vandal anon was. [[User:Etz Haim|Etz Haim]] 14:33, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
== Treaties =RISC===
The basic concept of [[RISC]] is to clearly identify what step 2 does. In older processor designs, now retroactively known as [[CISC]], the instructions were offered in a number of different modes that meant that step 2 took an unknown length of time to complete. In RISC, almost all instructions come in exactly one mode that reads data from one place -- the registers. These ''addressing modes'' are then handled by the [[compiler]], which writes code to load the data into the registers and store it back out. For this reason the term '''load-store''' is often used to describe this philosophy in design; there are many processors with limited instruction sets that are not really RISC.
I have given the reasons, may be you haven't read them. The treaties have no reference whatsoever to Macedonia as the only territorial change was the transfer of the town of Strumitza from Bulgaria to Yugoslavia. Eastern Macedonia had been given to Greece as early as 1913. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]
The side effect of this change is twofold. One is that the resulting logic core is much smaller, largely by making step 1 and 2 much simpler. Secondly it means that step 2 always takes one cycle, also reducing the complexity of the overall chip design which would otherwise require complex "locks" that ensure the processor completes one instruction before starting the other. For any given level of performance, a RISC design will have a much smaller "gate count" (number of transistors), the main driver in overall cost -- in other words a fast RISC chip is much cheaper than a fast CISC chip.
As far as I know there was no pre-war agreement between Bulgaria and Greece on teritorial claims. The reason is that Greece was considered to have second class army and the Bulgarian generals believed that the Greek army could not advance fast. Thus the pre war agreement between Greece and the other Christian States of the Balkans was that everyone "holds what he gets". [[User:Newcomer|Newcomer]] 22:08, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The downside is that the program gets much longer as a side effect of the compiler having to write out explicit instructions for memory handling, the "code density" is lower. This increases the number of instructions that have to be read over the computer bus. When RISC was first being introduced there were arguments that the increased bus access would overwhelm the speed, and that such designs would actually be slower. In theory this might be true, but the real reason for RISC was to allow [[instruction pipeline]]s to be built much more easily.
Yeah, but there was a pre-war treaty between Serbia and Bulgaria which the Serbs broke. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]15:44, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
===Instruction pipelining===
Then it should be written in the article the whole truth.[[User:Newcomer|Newcomer]] 22:09, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
One of the first, and most powerful, techniques to improve performance is the [[instruction pipeline]]. Early microcoded designs would carry out all of the steps above for one instruction before moving onto the next. Large portions of the circuitry were left idle at any one step, for instance, the instruction decoding circuitry would be idle during execution and so on.
Pipelines improve performance by allowing a number of instructions to work their way through the processor at the same time. In the same basic example, the processor would start to decode (step 1) a new instruction while the last one was waiting for results. This would allow up to four instructions to be "in flight" at one time, making the processor look four times as fast. Although any one instruction takes just as long to complete, there's still four steps, the CPU as a whole "retires" instructions much faster and can be run at a much higher clock speed.
Well, I didn't have the time to do that yesterday:-) [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 09:44, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
RISC make pipelines smaller, and much easier to construct by cleanly separating each stage of the instruction process and making them take the same amount of time -- one cycle. The processor as a whole operates in an [[assembly line]] fashion, with instructions coming in one side and results out the other. Due to the reduced complexity of the [[Classic RISC pipeline]], the pipelined core and an instruction cache could be placed on the same size die that would otherwise fit the core alone on a CISC design. This was the real reason that RISC was faster, early designs like the [[SPARC]] and [[MIPS architecture|MIPS]] often running over 10 times as fast as [[Intel]] and [[Motorola]] CISC solutions at the same clock speed and price.
Generally we agree on the way the things happened during the second Balkan war. I do not understand why you are deleting certain frases which are totally true. Although you try to be objective you also try to avoid the reference of certain things which might "spoil the Bulgarian image", like the advance of the Greek army inside Bulgarian territory or the fact that Eastern Macedonia was a present from nazi Germany to Bulgaria for its participation in the axis alliance. Sometimes you also delete things which are not against Bulgaria and are totaly true like the attack of the Turkish army against the Bulgarian forces during the second Balkan war. If you do that in order to save some kilobytes then maybe we could create a new link. I edit a few things and wait for your answer.[[User:Newcomer|Newcomer]] 22:17, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Pipelines are by no means limited to RISC designs. By 1986 the top-of-the-line VAX (the 8800) was a heavily pipelined design, slightly predating the first commercial MIPS and SPARC designs. Most modern CPUs (even embedded CPUs) are now pipelined, and microcoded CPUs with no pipelining are seen only in the most area-constrained embedded processors. Large CISC machines, from the VAX 8800 to the modern Pentium 4 and Athlon, are implemented with both microcode and pipelines. Improvements in pipelining and caching are the two major microarchitectural advances that have enabled processor performance to keep pace with the circuit technology on which they are based.
::The paragraph about the "Serbian and Greek troops" duplicates something that has been already stated. The Turkish advance in Thrace doesn't really have anything to do with the article as it was not decisive for the course of the war as, for example, the Romanian was. But if you insist so much on it, you can add it.
::The "present": eastern Macedonia was handed over by the Germans to Bulgaria for "administration" not as a "present". Plus this kind of phrases are not advisable in encyclopedia articles - it sounds so tabloid-like that it hurts.
::Where have I tried to save the "Bulgarian image"?:-)) The Greek army was stopped in the Kresna gorge - well, after it burned all Bulgarian villages from Kukush to Kresna... [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 23:20, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
===Speculative execution===
I think that the Turkish advance was really important on the military field and its reference shows that Bulgaria was fighting against one more enemy, so it had to divide its forces sending less troops at the Macedonian fronts. This is the only reason for my insistence.
One problem with an instruction pipeline is that there are a class of instructions that must make their way entirely through the pipeline before execution can continue. In particular, conditional branches need to know the result of some prior instruction before "which side" of the branch to run is known. For instance, an instruction that says "if x is larger than 5 then do this, otherwise do that" will have to wait for the results of x to be known before it knows if the instructions for this or that can be fetched.
For a small four-deep pipeline this means a delay of up to three cycles -- the decode can still happen. But as clock speeds increase the depth of the pipeline increases with it, and modern processors may have 20 stages or more. In this case the CPU is being stalled for the vast majority of its cycles every time one of these instructions is encountered.
As for the Bulgarian image I was refering to the alliance with nazi Germany.
The solution, or one of them, is ''[[speculative execution]]'', also known as ''branch prediction''. In reality one side or the other of the branch will be called much more often than the other, so it is often correct to simply go ahead and say "x will likely be smaller than five, start processing that". If the prediction turns out to be correct, a huge amount of time will be saved. Modern designs have rather complex prediction systems, which watch the results of past branches to predict the future with greater accuracy.
You are right the Greek army stopped at the Cresna gorge and was very close to destruction due to false military decisions And the Serbo-Bulgarian ceasefire. I believe you that the Greek army commited attrocities when entered the Bulgarian territory. In Greek history books you will read that these atrocities were commited because the soldiers were angry by the attrocities commited by the retreating Bulgarian army specially at the city of Drama. There was a lot of hate between Balkan nations at the beginning of the century. Every nation believed that it was the "chosen" to dominate the others. In our history books we read that the Bulgarians considered themselves as the "Prussians of the balkans" and believed that they should dominate all neighbours.
===Cache===
If you think that such mentions should not be incorporated in a wikipedia article then maybe there could be a reference that during these wars the result of the nationalisms and the commitment of attrocities against civilians by all created a lot of hate between nations. Something like that.
It was not long before improvements in chip manufacturing allowed for even more circuitry to be placed on the die, and designers started looking for ways to use it. One of the most common was to add an ever-increasing amount of [[CPU cache|cache memory]] on-die. Cache is simply very fast memory, memory that can be accessed in a few cycles as opposed to "many" needed to talk to main memory. The CPU includes a cache controller which automates reading and writing from the cache, if the data is already in the cache it simply "appears", whereas if it is not the processor is "stalled" while the cache controller reads it in.
[[User:Newcomer|Newcomer]] 23:54, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
RISC designs started adding cache in the mid-to-late 1980s, often only 4k in total. This number grew over time, and modern CPU's typically include about 512kbytes, while CPU's intended for server use come with 1 or 2 Mbytes. Generally speaking, more cache means more speed.
Ok, I'll add the remark about the Ottoman advance then. But I'll have to correct you on the atrocities - the Greeks set fire to Kukush first and it was because it was an absolutely pure Exarchist town without any patriarchists. The burning of Serres came afterwards. And I think you are confusing the burning of Drama either with WWII or with the burning of Serres, Drama was not burned, there was, however, a massacre at Doxaton. And I don't need to tell you what is said in the Bulgarian textbooks about the Greeks. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 23:36, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
===Out-of-order execution===
Hello VMORO it's me again. I deleted the term Bulgarian on the town of Kilkis. It was never a Bulgarian town. It was Ottoman and now it is Greek. I could accept your claim of tottaly pro exarchic town if you can provide some contemporary Ottoman figures on the various nations in the area/town. I would be really interested to hear what the Bulgarian books say about the Greeks. I assure you we do NOT feel superior race.
Use of cache also introduces a new delay when the data asked for by the CPU is not already in the cache. In early designs this would force the cache controller to stall the processor and wait. Of course there may be some other instruction in the program whose data ''is'' available in the cache at that point. [[out-of-order execution]] allows that instruction to be processed while the processor waits on the cache, then re-orders the results to make it appear that everything happened in the normal order.
===Superscalar designs===
As for the "superiority feeling" that you have, look again at your writings. At the second Balkan war Bulgaria was defeated. It choose to fight against it's 2 former allies and it was later attacked by 2 more neighbours. This is agoog excuse for defeat for any nation. You are not satisfied with this. You feel that you must present it as a victory. So you mention only the possibility of a Greek defeat the last 2 days of the war, trying to avoid the fact that the Bulgarian army was in full retreat in all fronts and only the last 2 days managed to achieve a defensive victory against the advancing Greek army. The Serbian army chose to stop its operations when achieved ALL its goals and only then the Bulgarian army took a breath. You continually delete this fact although it is the major reason (along with the military stupid decisions of the Greek King) of the Bulgarian defensive victory.
Even with all of the added complexity and gates needed to support the concepts outlined above, chip manufacturing had soon made even them have room left over. This led to the rise of [[superscalar]] processors in the early 1990s, processors that could run more than one instruction at once.
In the outline above the processor runs parts of a single instruction at a time. If one were simply to place two entire cores on a die, then the processor would be able to run two instructions at once. However this is not actually required, as in the average program certain instructions are much more common than others. For instance, the load-store instructions on a RISC design are more common than [[floating point]], so building two complete cores isn't as efficient a use of space as building two load-store units and only one floating point.
I also think that there should be a link to an article that talks generally about the nationalisms at the begining of the century. [[User:Newcomer|Newcomer]] 18:17, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
In modern designs it is common to find two load units, one store (many instructions have no results to store), two or more integer math units, two or more floating point units, and often a [[SIMD]] unit of some sort. The decoder grows in complexity by reading in a huge list of instructions from memory and handing them off to the different units that are idle at that point. The results are then collected and re-ordered at the end, as in out-of-order.
===Simultaneous multithreading===
== Disambiguation text ==
One of the newest techniques in high-speed processor design is [[simultaneous multithreading]]. Oddly it may have been easier to add this in the past than some of the other techniques described above.
The cache controller knows where in main memory any piece of data came from. It therefore "knows" that different data in the cache are actually from different programs entirely, a side effect of modern [[computer multitasking|multitasking]] [[operating system]]s. In simultaneous multithreading designs, the cache controller will not look just for the instruction that is ready, but the program (or thread) that is "most ready". This can be quite effective in many cases, as programs often switch between handling data and processing, simultaneous multithreading can make more effecient use of the various units in these cases by going out and finding entirely different programs to run while the "running one" waits for data.
At 14:17, 30 Apr 2005 I (Ninio) said : ''For other uses is enough. No need to mention every other alternative in the opening section. That's why the disambiguation tag and page is for.''
== See also ==
At 14:43, 30 Apr 2005 Jonathunder said :''great many readers are looking for the country here. primary disambig of that does the reader the courtesy of not having to go thru two DAB.''
* [[Microprocessor]]
The equal amount of users may looking for the historical region of Macedonia (Macedon) and the Greek region of Macedonia, since the majority of the western world at least, ever heard about before the 1990s, were these "regions-definitions".
* [[Moore's Law]]
By using the [[Republic of Macedonia]] wiki, in the opening section, is like granting some form of exclusivity of the whole geographical region to the republic. This may lead the lay user to believe that the country is somewhat synonymous to the whole region.
* [[Amdahl's law]]
* [[Simultaneous multithreading]]
* [[RISC]]
* [[CISC]]
[[Category:Computer architecture]]
There is nothing wrong with the Republic and its name, commonly used, of course but we all know how delicate this matter is. Besides, the greater part of the geographic Macedonian region is Greek, why not mention '' For the Greek Macedonian region see wiki X '' ?
[[nl:Processorarchitectuur]]
I think it's wise to avoid this "trap", and just use the disambiguation page for the purpose of which it was created. It's fair and exact for all "parties" involved. -- [[User:Ninio|Ninio]] 04:35, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
:The [[Republic of Macedonia]] is refered to as Macedonia often enough that readers not familiar with the country will be looking for it under the name. Now you and I understand that is confusing, but many readers will not, and we want to educate them, As it stands now, the means of educating them that the region is NOT the country is buried well into the second paragraph. Having a primary DAB alerts them right off. I am not trying to push a POV; I just want the page clearly disambiguated. Lumping a country in a disambig page (in the middle of that page, BTW) is NOT the best solution for the casual reader. [[User:Jonathunder|Jonathunder]] 04:55, 2005 May 1 (UTC)
::But *every* country in this modern geographical region is "buried" (even though I disagree with this characterisation) in the second paragraph. That's the whole point. Not to unwillingly, deliberately or spuriously grant any form of exclusivity of the wider region --in its modern sense, since there is also the (avant) classical sense, but that's another issue -- to any country. By using the name Macedonia in a country's name, does not (and should not IMHO) imply any form of exclusivity to this region, *especially* when we are aware of the "taxonomy" of the land and more importantly of the past and current concerns of all parties involved. The lay user is clearly presented with the disambiguation facts of the article, the uses of the name Macedonia and can read accordingly. BTW users do not need to go through two DABs but only one (?) -- [[User:Ninio|Ninio]] 05:53, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
:::Disambiguation is not a pissing contest; it's an aid for our users. In this case, as the country is often called Macedonia, and thus many people will be looking for the country, it makes sense to make it easier for them. --[[User:SPUI|SPUI]] ([[User talk:SPUI|talk]]) 06:05, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
:::: Using the same logic many people are or will be looking for Macedon or other countries of the region as Greece. Why exclude those from the text? In the DAB all forms are included and clearly presented in a "fair" manner. -- [[User:Ninio|Ninio]] 06:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
:::I agree. It would be very common for English-speakers to look up the Republic of Macedonia by "Macedonia." The very first item in the [[America]] disambiguation page is the United States--not because that's synonymous with America but because it's often called that and lots of people will look for it there. [[User:Demi|Demi]] <sup>[[User_talk:Demi|T]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Demi|C]]</sub> 06:10, 2005 May 1 (UTC)
:::: That's exactly my point. This is not the disambiguation page; it's the article of the wider (broad) geographical region known in modern times or referred to as Macedonia. This is clearly and easily presented to the user as such, providing also easily accessible aid about the uses of the name, the country, the Greek region, the historical region etc. -- [[User:Ninio|Ninio]] 06:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
::::*This is known as "primary disambiguation," and it's used when such a usage is very common. Let's not play tricks on people trying to find Macedonia. A decent alternative, if many of the uses you refer to are roughly equivalent, would be to make [[Macedonia]] a disambiguation page and move this to [[Macedonia (region)]]. [[User:Demi|Demi]] <sup>[[User_talk:Demi|T]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Demi|C]]</sub> 06:24, 2005 May 1 (UTC)
==Propaganda FYROMs is not the neutral point of view==
All articles over [[Macedonia]] do not correspond the [[Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view|neutral point of
view]]!The articles are carriers of a [[Propaganda|propaganda]] [[FYROM]]s
[[User:Vergina|Vergina]] 07:51, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
::Firstable: DON'T YOU FYROM ME!!! Call me by my name: Macedonia.
::Now, my friendship to you Vergina. You have to understand that noone wants to take a part of the history away from Greece, or the Aegean part of Macedonia. This is 21st century. Aegean Macedonia is now Greek and it will stay forever.
::Another thing. I agree, nowdays Macedonians are not exclusive owners of the term Macedonia. That means that we are not the only ancestors of the Antique Macedonians. That is a history that we share, we are both (Greeks and nowdays Macedonians) ancestors of the Antique Macedonians. That is a fact. Search for some genes research and you will see that the nowdays Macedonians have a lot of Mediteranian genes in us, much more than Slavic genes.
::We are talking about 2500 years of history. Are you aware how many generations are that? How much mixing happened in this teritory, especially because most of us are Ortodox Cristians?
::Relax my friend. I am NOT claiming that I have the exclusivity over the Macedonian name. But, you can not take my Macedonian identity away. That is how I was born, that is how I will die.
::Yes, you have a right to a part of the name Macedonia, but same as me, as Macedonian. But NON OF US hase an exclusive right.
::[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 14:13, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
==Title changed and locked==
From [[Macedonia]] to [[Region of Macedonia]].
:''Macedonia is a geographical and historical region - intro says so''
I did this. If anyone objects, please say so. There is no move log, so this is the only way I can find you! [[User:Ed Poor|-- Uncle Ed]] [[user talk:Ed Poor|(talk)]] 22:46, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
:''(copied from [[Talk:Macedonian Slavs]])''<br> I'm not sure it was an improvement, to be honest - it makes it sound like a disambiguated page when it's not. Consider "region of Epirus", "region of Thrace", "region of New England" etc. I don't think adding "region of" really adds anything. It's a region by definition; calling it "region of" seems rather like a tautology. -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] 22:55, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Region of Macedonia? ==
How can someone just prance in and move the article like that? We just had a 2-week poll on whether to move [[Macedonian Slavs]], and that failed.--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 22:57, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
And what are the reasons and the arguments for this move? I think it should be reverted.
[[User:Matia.gr|MATIA]] 23:27, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:I agree - we need to have more discussion before making this move. I've moved the article back to [[Macedonia]] to restore the ''status quo'' while we discuss it. Please note that this ''doesn't'' mean that I'm forcing this name on anyone, but we should discuss the matter before we rename it again. -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] 00:24, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::I really don't know what to say about this, I think that it should stay Macedonia as it is - a geographical and historical region. Not sure, though. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 11:20, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:::There you go. If people X and people Y actually agree on something, stick with it.--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 12:55, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::::Theathenae, "people like FlavrSavr" are not exclusive representatives of people X. Moreover, there are other interested readers/contributors to this article, so Wikipedia does not need any "approval" of people X or Y. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 18:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:On the [[nl:Macedonië|Dutch wikipedia]], typing "Macedonia" leads to where it should in my opinion: a disambiguation page from which you can choose what Macedonia you are looking for. It's actually so obvious that I wonder why it isn't like that here. The last edit was August 24, 2004 which added Macedonia as Roman province (as to show that it is not subject to political wars).
::I agree to the Dutch idea. I am Macedonian, but I am aware that the historical region of Macedonia has to be shared between several nations living in the area. Can you just imagine how much mixing happened in 2500 years? Especially, when generally all of the nations around are Cristian Ortodox. Every nation around has a part of the Antique Macedonians inside them, especially the Greeks and nowday Macedonians. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 14:00, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
==Avars==
This article mentions the [[Avars]] but WIkipedia has two articles about Avars: [[Caucasian Avars|Caucasian]] and [[Eurasian Avars|Eurasian]]. To which does this article refer? [[User:Jaberwocky6669|Jaberwocky6669]] 21:56, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
:Eurasian, surely! -- [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]] 22:05, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:Surely as in: "I would think so" or "Absolutely positively!!!"? [[User:Jaberwocky6669|Jaberwocky6669]] 22:15, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
==Vardarska banovina==
*1) This was a temporary territorial division for a total of 12 years during a period when Vardar Macedonia was practically occupied by Serbia, the name and the borders were given by the Serbian administration.
*2) The "banovina" included also southern Serbia and southern Kosovo, it was aimed to be a "supranational" territorial unit, so as to curb any nationalistic movements of the Albanians and the Bulgarians/Macedonian Slavs. Considering that Vardarska banovina was twice the size of modern FYROM, how can you claim that FYROM was formerly known this way???
*3) It is never said in literature that FYROM was known before as VB, it is said only that it was made PART of it.
*4) Now, the most sensitive part - this is pretty much like me putting brackets behind [[East Macedonia and Thrace]] saying that it was "formerly known as Belomorska Makedoniya" because this was the official name of the province between 1941 and 1944 when it was part of Bulgaria. I doubt any of you is gonna be too happy with that.
*5) I had previously thought that you, Theathanae, and Ninio were moderate enough not to allow such bullshit. We all protect our national interests here (at least all on the Balkans), this is perfectly normal and understandable but an understanding that there are different viepoints and a will not to allow offensive comments is a prerequisite for the normal functioning of articles which have mutually overlapping interests like this one. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] July 8, 2005 07:44 (UTC)
:Your current edit recognises the reality that "Vardar Macedonia" is redundant now that it is an independent state. But if you're going to include it as an historical name, you should also find room somewhere for Vardarska banovina. As for ''Belomorska Makedoniya'', I have no problem with including it as "the official name of the province between 1941 and 1944 when it was ''occupied by the fascist Bulgarian régime/Nazi collaborator''". Cheers.--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 8 July 2005 09:52 (UTC)
== PERSIANS NAMING OF THE GREEKS & THE VARIOUS GREEKS TRIBES ==
There are several types of Yauna in the Achaemenid Royal Inscriptions:
(1)
Yaunβ in general: the same as the Greeks known as "Ionians", i.e.,
those living in Asia Minor. They can already be found in the Behistun
Inscription, when the Persian rule had not yet reached Europe. This
identification is 100% certain.
(2)
Yaunβ takabarβ, the 'Greeks with shield-shaped hats'. First mentioned
in DNa ( http://www.livius.org/aa-ac/achaemenians/DNa.html ), where
they are distinguished from the "normal" Yaunβ: an almost certain
reference to the Macedonian sunhats.
(3 and 4)
"The Yaunβ, near and across the sea": another division, for the first
time found in DSe ( http://www.livius.org/aa-ac/achaemenians/DSe.html
) and in a slightly different form in the Daiva Inscription by Xerxes
(XPh: http://www.livius.org/aa-ac/achaemenians/XPh.html ). The obvious
reading is "the Asian Yauna and the European Yauna", i.e., -again-
Asian Greeks and Macedonians.
On the other hand, Persian inscriptions are fairly stereotypical, and
the fact that there is a small difference between the precise wording
of DSe and XPh suggests that there is a difference. Perhaps, there is
a difference between the "Yauna across the sea" and the sunhat-Yaunβ.
If this is correct, the Yauna across the sea must be either Cypriot
Greeks (but why didn't Darius, who seems to have subdued Cyprus,
mention them?) or the Thessalians, Boeotians, and Athenians - nations
that Xerxes could claim to have conquered.
(5)
There is a seal from the age of Xerxes (
http://www.livius.org/a/1/greece/yauna_seal.jpg ) in which the great
king defeats someone looking like a Yauna. It is unique, because a
second man appears to have a hand in the killing, and this man looks
like a Yauna. Is this the Macedonian king Alexander who helps killing
a Thessalian/Boeotian/Athenian??
Such instances are extremely rare since only a handful
of original Persian texts have survived.There are of references by Darius I in
the Behistun Inscription to Sardis (OP Sparda), Ionia (OP Yauna) and
Cappadocia (OP Katpatuka). There are also a couple of statements
concerning the Greeks and their tribes in the Babylonian tablets.
== Neutral Wikipedia? ==
Dear Wikipedia administrator
I am writting you about the issue of Macedonia, Republic of Macedonia, Macedonian Slavs (like Wikipedia calls the Macedonians) and the problem between Macedonia and Greece about the term Macedonia.
I am aware that this issue is largely discussed here, at Wikipedia, and Wikipedia claims that it is trying to take a neutral side. But, that is not the case. Wikipedia is everything except neutral in this question. In the following lines I will explain you why.
From the text in Wikipedia most of the people will conclude that Macedonian nation appeared during the World War 2 and Tito was the one who 'invented' us. The family of my wife (she is Mexican) read this and asked me is it truth. That was actually the first time I read what Wikipedia says about my nation, which was a direct reason for my reaction.
My grandfather is born in 1911th. Yesterday I had a talk with him. He took a part in the strugle for independence since 1925th and he took a part in the 2nd world war. He is alive and personal prove that Wikipedia is full of bullshit and lies about our origin. He spent half of his life proving and fighting for that. He was shot 3 times, all 3 from the Bulgarians who wanted to ocupy Macedonia in the Balkan wars and in the WW1 and WW2. Just a 1 min with him will show you how many lies you suport in Wikipedia.
I tried to edit some of the text few days ago, but everithing I wrote was deleted. And all I wrote were facts.
Fact 1. Macedonians (or Macedonian Slavs, like ONLY Wikipedia, Greece and Cyprus calls us) is the only nation of many living in the area concentrated inside the borders of the geographical region of Macedonia.
This is a pure fact, something that you can even find on the CIA web page. Can you give any fact to deny my fact? If you can not, why you erased it from Wikipedia?
Fact 2. Republic of Macedonia has diplomatic relations with about 150 countries in the world. Wikipedia says that "at least 20" countries recognize Macedonia under the name Macedonia. Guess what? That number is more than 100. And this is an officially confirmed by our ministery for foreighn affairs.
Fact 3. Wikipedia says that my country Contraversialy calls itself Republic of Macedonia. This is a pure example of taking a side in the problem. Why you don't say that Greece contraversialy deny us the use of the name Macedonia?
If you intended to be neutral, just write that we have the naming problem with Greece, but do not call my name "contraversial"!!!
Fact 4. While explaining about the antient Macedonia, its kings etc. you highly support the claim for their Greek origin. I can give you 1000s of facts that that is not truth and I beleive that some Greek guy can give you 1000s facts that those claims are truth. That was 2400 years ago and there is no chanse for us to know the real situation. We can only guess.
But, when you give the Greek suported version, why you ignore the version suported by the newaged Macedonians? In this moment I can give you 10 names of internationally respected scientist supporting our theory. If you are neutral, why you ignore it?
Fact 5. Wikipedia says that the Turkish Empire were calling us Bulgarians. Strange, because the Turks were recognizing the uniqueness of our nation since the moment they occupied the teritory of Macedonia. Actually, the Turkish history archives are the biggest prove of our existance, history and culture. Did anyone of you ever read anything from those archives? Even on the birth certificate of Khemal Ataturk says that he is born in Bitola, Macedonia. And his autobiography is full of memories of his childhood spend with the Macedonians.
Fact 6. Wikipedia ignores the egsodus of the Macedonian people from Greece and says they were running because they were supporters of the comunists. 1/3 of the Macedonians have origin from this part of Macedonia. They were runned away from there by force and you can find many historical proves for that. Again, big part of my family has origin from there. As a matter of fact, my grand-grand father was married to a Greek woman, my grand-grand mother. But, no matter of that, his house was burned and he was forced to run away for his life and the life of his family.
How dare you deny this? Do you know that even today my grand father is not allowed to visit Greece, because he was a kid when his family runned away from there?
Fact 7. There are about 500 000 Macedonians that live outside Macedonia, mostly in Canada, Australia, USA, Sweden etc. At least 1/3 moved there before 1930s. If we were a product of Tito, how can you explain that even they feel of Macedonian nationality? I have a family in USA which moved there in 1927th. Their ancestors (my cousins) do not even know how to talk Macedonian well. But, they still feel Macedonian. One of them is even one of the financiers of the party of the Macedonians in Bulgaria, trying to help their strugle to keep their national identity. I repeat, first time he visited Macedonia was in 1995th, far after Tito. And his family moved in USA in 1927th, far before Tito.
Fact 8. Wikipedia claims that the book of Macedonian songs by Dimitar Miladinov is actually Bulgarian. Have you maybe seen a original copy of the book, printed in Croatia? IT says clearly "Macedonian". Not to mention that the same author wrote one of the most important books in the Macedonian history "For the Macedonian issues", again printed in Croatia, where it clearly talks about the Macedonian nation and non-Bulgarian origin.
All this was simply erased from the database. I didn't erase anything when editing these pages, I support the other side and I do not want to hide their facts. But why Wikipedia wants to hide our facts, which show that we are not a product of Tito's ambitions for the Aegean Sea. In Tito's time, the Yugoslav army was far superior in the region. If he wanted the Aegean Sea, he would get it very easily.
Many things in Wikipedia are very offensive for the nowdays Macedonians. Wikipedia simply ignores us, gives us a new name and supports the theories of denial of our existance, culture and history.
I will try to give you an example that includes with Mexico. I beleive that you know that the Maya civilisation was invaded by the Spanish kingdom. Spanish were ruling Mexico for centuries and millions of Spanish people moved at Mexican teritory. Later, after the liberation war, Mexicans formed its own country.
Fact 1. Mayas were living in Mexico (same as Antique Macedonians).
Fact 2. Spanish invaded them and great number of Spanish people moved to Mexico (The Slavs moved on the theritory of Macedonia and there was no reported fights or movements of people away from the teritory where the Slavs settled).
Fact 3. Nowdays, everyone of the Mexican is aware that they are partly Spanish, but they still have Mayan origin (Wikipedia says that the people living in Republic of Macedonia are Slavs. When there was no reported resetling of the Antique Macedonians, how is possible they not to mix with the Slavs? It is a fact that the nowdays Macedonians are not same as the Antique Macedonians, but they certanly have a significant part of their genes. Same as I beleive that Greece has a part of their Genes, but they are definitly not their direct ancestors).
Fact 4. Mexican speak Spanish. Reason: The Spanish culture was superior in that time. (The Antique Macedonians accepted the Helenic culture, including a variation of the Greek language. Reason: the Helenic culture was superior in that time. Everyone who knows at least little history will know that Hellenic and Greek are not synonims. Greek is nation, Hellenic is religion/culture. USA and England both speak English, both are mostly cristians, but they are SEPARATE nations. Aren't they? Same happens to Germany and Austria, or Serbia and Croatia, or Canada and France, or Brazil and Portugal, or the rest of Latin America and Spain)
And here is a comment about the claims of the Bulgarians, that the Macedonians are actually Bulgarians.
If that is truth, I am going to kill myself. Bulgarians through the history made the worst for my nation. During the strugle of the Macedonian people for independence from the Turkish empire, at the end of the 19th and begginbing of the 20th century, the Bulgarians were the ones who killed the most of our revolutionaries, including 4 members of my close family which were members of the Macedonian revolutionary organization (VMRO). Whis is not something that I was told by Tito. My grandfather (the same grandfather from above) was in fact a member of the same organization. He personaly knew many of the revolutioners that Bulgarians claim are theirs, including 2 of the leaders: Goce Delcev and Gorce Petrov. They were Macedonians and they all gave their lives for free and independent Macedonia and they had nothing to do with Bulgaria. There was a part of them who were Bulgarians inserted in the organizations, who were actually the killers of the real Macedonian revolutioners, because it was in Bulgarian interest to weaken the organization, so they could take the lead in the organization and later put Macedonia in the hands of the Bulgarians. Thanks god, they did not succeed.
Wikipedia claims that VMRO was pro-Bulgarian and the revolutioners were Bulgarian fighters. You suposed to see the face of my 94 year old grandfather when I told him your claims.
Neurtal Wikipedia? I do not think so.
At the end I have to ask for Wikipedia NOT TO TAKE A SIDE IN THIS. I am not asking to remove the Greek and Bulgarian side of the story. But, why you ignore our claims, which are suported by many non-Greek and non-Bulgarian scientists and very largely through the web.
There are just about 2-2.5 million Macedonians around the world. We do not have enought influence and strenght as Greece has, which is much more powerful and richer country than Macedonia.
The Macedonian-Greek question is too hard and too complicated to solve. History can be interpreted in 1000 ways, especially on a teritory like the Balcany, where there are so many nations on so little space. Fortunately, DNA testings are getting more and more reliable and soon it will be possible to be used to acuratelly show the origin of our nations. I hope that then the denyal of me, my history, culture and existance will finaly stop. It is very disapointing that Wikipedia takes a part in all that.
With all the respect,
Igor Šterbinski
Skopje, Macedonia
is@on.net.mk
----
ALL the Macedonian history (the one that the Macedonians, the one that Wikipedia calls Macedonian Slavs) before the 6th century is given in Wikipedia as Greek history. I am talking mostly about the Antient Macedonia. I do not claim that Macedonians (Macedonian Slavs in Wikipedia) have the exclusive right to this history. But, Greece can not have that right eighter. It is a history that this region shares and both, we (Macedonians) and Greeks have a part of our origin from those people.
In the same time ALL the Macedonian history after the 6th century is given in Wikipedia as Bulgarian history. I am talking about the Wikipedia claims that in the 9th century the Macedonian Slavs got Bulgarized or assimilated by Greece, that in the 10th century Macedonia become a center of Bulgaria (which is not truth, because there are 1000s of hard proves and writtings found in Ohrid denying the Bulgarian claims), the tzar Samoil kingdom (which was everything than Bulgarian, because he had several fights with them and won in all and you can find again 1000s of proves in his fortress in Ohrod), then the Macedonian Ohrid Archbishopry which was clearly Macedonian and everything else than Bulgarian, with dressings and crowns with a completely different stile than the Bulgarian ones. Later Wikipedia claims that after 1018th Byzantine Empire makes Macedonia a Bulgarian province, but it doesn't say the reason for it (the Bulgarians were fighting at his side, so this was his reward towards them, something that will happen in the WW2, when the biggest part of Macedonia will be given to Bulgaria by the Germans. 3 of 4 sons of Samoil were actually latter killed by pro-Bulgarians Another reason is the wish of Vasili II to make a revenge towars Samoil and his people, with denying them, something that Wikipedia does NOW). Then, Wikipedia claims that the Ottoman Empire was seeing us as Bulgarians, which is completely not truth. You have incredible written archives in Turkish museums for this, so you can make a search by your own. All the Macedonian uprisings were characterised as Macedonians. Even the after-capture execution of the leaders was taking place in Skopje, the biggest town in the teritory of Macedonia and not in Sofija, which was the Bulgarian biggest town.
Wikipedia says that the following Macedonian history is Bulgarian: IMRO, Ilinden Uprising in Krusevo (where the only newspapers that write about it as Bulgarian uprising are the ones who didn't have their Journalists in the region and were using the Bulgarian sources, which in that time was already liberated, who wanted to show the uprising as their own. Why you don't read some Russian sources which have their journalists in Krusevo and Bitola at the time? Some of the grand sons and grand daughters of the revolutioners are still alive, so you might ask them what their grand-fathers were fighting for. The Krusevo Manifesto says that their goal is FREE and INDEPENDENT Macedonia. Why would their form their own Republic, if they wanted to be part of Bulgaria? All Wikipedia claims simply have no sence), Goce Delchev and the other revolutioners (NOTE: Goce Delchevs nephews which are still alive all spent half of their life proving Goce Delchev's belongding to the Macedonian nation. NOTE 2: Why would he fight for Macedonia's independence if he was Bulgarian? If he was Bulgarian, wouldn't he fight for unification of Macedonia and Bulgaria? Why was he betrayed by a Bulgarian, which resultet in his death in Banica 1903rd? You are corupting our biggest revolutioner, something that we keep as a saint). Wikipedia says that the "St Cyril and Methodius" high school in Solun, where Delchev studied was Bulgarian. How come, when no Bulgarians were living in Solun?...
A prove for the Bulgarian, Serb and Greek ambitions to assimilate the Macedonians and take their teritory is the deals and fights they had in the both Balcan wars. They were all exterminating the Macedonians, burning their houses and grabbing their lands, but Wikipedia completely ignores all that. I (and many more) have a living family members who were witnesses of that time.
Then, the WW2, when 2/3 of Macedonia was given to Bulgaria by the Germans. Why the hell 100000 Macedonians were fighting against the Bugarians? 25000 died in that war, again many members of my family. And Wikipedia says that we have Bulgarian origin. Why they didn't fight at the Bulgarian side if that was the case?
Wikipedia later claims that our country (Republic of Macedonia) was given to us by Tito. What a lie!!! As I said 100000 Macedonians were fighting for freedom. If Tito made us be under the Serbs again, that wouldn't be freedom and 100000 heavily armed Macedonians would continue fighting for it. Even my 94 year old grand-father, who took a part in the WW2 fighting for the partizans, and who was looking at Tito as a saint agrees with this, that he wouldn't rest till he saw Macedonia free.
Wikipedia even denies the exodus of 250 000 Macedonians from Greece, saying they were running away by their own. Who the hell will leave his house and land if he was not forced to? My other grand father's house was burned and he was shoot at in order to make him leave his hometown.
On some places Wikipedia says that this 'Bulgarian part' of the history might be Macedonian, but that is very well hidden so it even can hardly be noticed.
On the other hand, Wikipedia says that 'In 2000 several teenagers threw smoke bombs at the conference of pro-Bulgarian organisation 'Radko' in Skopje causing panic and confusion among the delegates'. Yes, that is completely truth. But in 1000s of years, you find one incident that we caused against the Bulgarians and you wrote it. What about centuries of incidents, murders, wars, assimilation made by the Bulgarians towards the Macedonians? What about the fact that Bulgaria and Greece do not allow the Macedonian parties in those countries to register and take a part in the ellections? This is something that was taken even to the European court. HOW CAN WIKIPEDIA IGNORE THIS???
BTW, Radko had just about 50 delegates and members. Most of them born in Bulgaria and moved latter in their life in Macedonia.
In this case, Wikipedia is only a tool in the Bulgarian and Greek propaganda of denying and stealing the Macedonian history, culture and existance. Just search the internet and you will see that this kind of 'history' can ONLY be found on pro-Bulgarian and pro-Greek web sites.
I am a living prove of the existance of the Macedonian nation. And that is not because I was told so by Tito. Macedonians were Macedonians far far before Tito. That is a fact that NOONE can change.
How dare you deny everything what I am? How dare you to deny 1000s of killed people, who gave their lives for FREE and INDEPENDENT Macedonia?
Senceirly,
Igor Šterbinski
Skopje, Macedonia
==protected==
I'd be angry too , but with your help we can make the article more neutral. That's how it works. We write an article as best as can, and then someone comes along and says ''"'''Wait a minute!''' From my point of view this article isn't neutral at all!"'' and helps fix it. Just stay cool! :-) (and don't type IN ALL CAPS LIKE THIS, it's considered impolite, feel free to re-add your comment formatted properly)
Ok, the rest of you folks, The page is protected on The Wrong Version (it always is), please discuss, and take it step by step. Apparently there were several glaring inaccuracies. See if you can fix them. [[User:Kim Bruning|Kim Bruning]] 12:47, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
::Sorry for the caps Kim. I am quite new at Wikipedia, that is why I make mistakes like this.
::And again thanks for the interest that you show on this issue. I know it is quite complicated and probably you are very bored reading all our claims and ideas, which very often oppose each other. It might be quite confusing for someone who is just starting getting to know this issue (I don't know if you have some previous experience).
::I know that there is a lot of work to be done, by I beleive that we might get a text for this and other issues when we will all be OK with.
::It will be hard to get to a real NPOV, but I beleive that we are on the right way.
::I just wish more Greek and Bulgarian administrators and users can include, but someone realistic, who is prepared to open its mind. And I hope we will have a mature and non-nationalistic discutions.
::[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 01:57, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
== Let's finally SOLVE this issue... ==
As you can see, there is real "writting war" for the issue of Macedonia which lasts for very long time.
Reason: there are 3 versiones of the history of Macedonia: Greek, Macedonian and Bulgarian. ALL 3 versiones are supported by respected scientists and historians. BUT, THE PROBLEM IS: THESE 3 VERSIONES HAVE SEVERAL ELEMENTS THAT ARE OPPOSING EACH OTHER.
There are 2 general issues:
The History of the Antique Macedonia: where Greece and nowdays Macedonia (Republic of Macedonia) oppose each other.
The History of Macedonia after the 6th century, when the Slavs arrived in the region: where Bulgaria and nowdays Macedonia (Republic of Macedonia) oppose each other. Especially the history since the 9th century.
Also there are serious opposings between Bulgaria and Greece about this teritory.
SO, IT IS AN ENDLESS CIRCLE.
That gives us a conclusion: ONLY POSSIBLE SOLUTION IS TO INCLUDE ALL 3 SIDES OF THE STORY. WIKIPEDIA SHOULD CLEARLY SAY WHAT GREEK VERSION SAYS, WHAT BULGARIAN VERSION SAYS AND WHAT MACEDONIAN VERSION SAYS. IN THE SAME TIME, THE VERSIONES SHOULD HAVE RANDOMIZE ORDER OF APPEARANCE. NO OF THE 3 VERSIONES CAN BE NATIONALISTIC. AND WIKIPEDIA SHOULD NEVER FORCE ANY OF THE 3 SIDES!!!
THAT IS THE ONLY WAY HOW WIKIPEDIA CAN STAY NEUTRAL. And the only way how all 3 sides can be satisfied and noone to feel ignored or offended.
SAME SHOULD HAPPEN TO ALL HISTORY RELATED TOPICS AND PERSONS WHICH ARE OPPOSED BY 2 OR MORE SIDES!!!
I think that there should be a public voting for this. I think that this can solve this SUPER SENSITIVE issue for all 3 sides.
So, I beg some of the administrators from a neutral country to get a lead in this.
And one more thing please. When posting comments on this page, ALWAYS put your nationality. That is how we will know which version you are supporting.
[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 13:04, 8 August 2005 (UTC), Nationality: Macedonian (Republic of Macedonia)
:so, [[WP:NPOV]], in a nutshell? But what is wrong with the present article? it certainly makes more sense to put the events in chronological order than to 'randomize' the account. Also, npov of course means that only views that are backed up with academic sources are represented. Givin equal weight to mainstream views and to random crackpot theories is ''not'' npov. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''ᛏ''')]]</small> 13:18, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
:So read through [[WP:NPOV]], present all the issues in chronological order with attributions for who thinks what on the contentious bits, and stop spamming. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 13:20, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
::Obviously you do not understand enought the issue of Macedonia. There is no possible POV in the world which will be Neutral enought. Only if you mention all the sides of the story. And, the text present doesn't. For example, it completely ignores the Macedonian side of the story. Actually, it is even assimilative for the Macedonians (Republic of Macedonia). (Please just read the comments of VMORO, you will see who is actually supporting this version of the page)
::If you remove the assimilation elements, probably some Greek or Bulgarian will comment that he does not agree. So, WE HAVE TO INCLUDE ALL.
::The elements are in chronological order. But, different nations claim different parts of the history and the persons involved. For example: How will you resolve the issue of the town Ohrid (and related elements) in the end of 10th and beginning of 11th century? Both, Bulgaria and Macedonia (Republic of Macedonia) claim this part of the history and persons related as their own.
::Just don't forget. You can find Valid and very well supported Proves for ALL THE SIDES of the story. EVERY side has valid and reasonable points. But, when together they are opposing each other. Picking any will result in not NPOV by Wikipedia.
::[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 13:31, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
::::''"There is no possible POV in the world which will be Neutral enought. Only if you mention all the sides of the story. And, the text present doesn't. For example, it completely ignores the Macedonian side of the story."'' NPOV says report the different point of views as being claimed by the people holding that viewpoint. If you have something you can sourc that shows the Macedonian POV has a different interpretation of history, then you should include it in the article, as the Macedonian point of view. i.e. "These people say this. Those people say that." [[User:FuelWagon|FuelWagon]] 17:54, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
:::::I already tried that. I was editing the page for Macedonia for several days. I never erased or hided anything that was already written, but I tried to put the Macedonian POV, which was completely ignored. Always when I was making any edit, my edit was been '''erased''' within hours.
:::::Another problem is that not everyone should be allowed to edit issues so sensitive like this one. It would be great if Wikipedia can be the place where we can solve our issues that last for centuries. But, life is not so simple. Unfortunatelly.
:::::And this is just the start. Whole Macedonian history after the 6th century, until 1945th, including all historical events and people are presented as Bulgarian here on Wikipedia. I understand that Bulgarians beleive that part of that history is theirs and I will never ignore their POV. Maybe I feel offended by it, maybe I see it as assimilation, but I never will ignore it. Because it is someones POV.
:::::But, what will happen when I try to add the Macedonian POV to those texts? I beleive that my edits will always be erased. So I will be there, wasting hours and hours and latter someone will just erase all my work. Just because they do not respect the POV of 2,5 million Macedonians around the world.
:::::That is why Wikipedia should '''always''' include all the versions of the story, present them well and make sure that noone is priviledged. It is not NPOV if Wikipedia ignores someone, no matter Macedonian, Greek, Bulgarian or Marsian. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 01:44, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
----
IMHO, the article is far far from NPOV. The very naming of Macedonians as "Macedonian Slavs" (which they consider offensive) is a direct violation of the NPOV policy and it is a priori giving a distorted view of the entire dispute. Please see [[Talk:Macedonian_Slavs/Poll#Resources|these resources]] provided by the neutral administrator ([[User:Zocky|Zocky]]). They are vandalized a bit by Greek users, but they still do provide a striking evidence how every major media outlet, encylopedia, international institution refers to Macedonians as Macedonians (not Macedonian Slavs). The ''mainstream view'' does not refer to them as "Macedonian Slavs", and therefore the current article is actually accepting ''random crackpot theories'' on '''fundamental questions''' (the identity of the inhabitants of RoM). Ironically, there is a sentence in it claiming that "Macedonians Slavs are ''sometimes'' referred to as Macedonians". '''That''' is how much the article is accurate.
I would quote [[User:ChrisO|ChrisO]], who recently won a '''barnstar''' for his work on ''NPOV in passionate national disputes'': ''Wikipedia has become seriously inconsistent with common usage and other reference sources by not using the Macedonians' own term to describe themselves''. Of course, we both agree that difference between them, Ancient Macedonians and the other Macedonians that use the term as a regional identifier (Greeks, Bulgarians), by dissambiguating names such as Macedonians (people), Macedonians (nationality) etc. Why Wikipedia still refers to Macedonians as "Macedonian Slavs", after a poll that was obviously decided on ethnic lines, is a great mystery to me. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 14:56, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
::I completely agree with FlavrSavr. The whole "state of the (F)art" idea to name the Macedonians [[Macedonian Slavs]] here in Wikipedia shows that Wikipedia is weaker than the nationalistic propaganda of the Greeks.
::Do not get me wrong. I support the idea that NOONE of us (nations on the Balkany) has the exclusive right on the name Macedonia. Both (Greek and nowday Macedonians) have origin (more or less) from the Antique Macedonians. But, searching the internet and other encyclopedias, it is hard NOT to notice that 90% of them reffer the nowdays Macedonians with that name, Macedonians. As I could see, CIA Factbook is very often reffered here as a good prove of some "theories". As a matter of fact, there they use the real term, Macedonians. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 17:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
Proof that the term '''Macedonian Slav''' is '''not''' a racial slur and it's being used by Slavo-Macedonian politicians:
''“We are '''Slavs''' who came to this area in the sixth century AD ... we are not descendants of the ancient Macedonians"'' (Foreign Information Service Daily Report, Eastern Europe, February 26, 1992, p. 35).
and:''"<b>We are Macedonians but we are '''Slav Macedonians'''.</b> That's who we are! We have no connection to Alexander the Greek and his Macedonia… Our ancestors came here in the 5th and 6th century"'' (Toronto Star, March 15, 1992).
* Ambassador of FYROM to USA, Ljubica Achevska:
"''We do not claim to be descendants of Alexander the Great … Greece is Macedonia’s second largest trading partner, and its number one investor. Instead of opting for war, we have chosen the mediation of the United Nations, with talks on the ambassadorial level under Mr. Vance and Mr. Nemitz.''" In reply to another question about the ethnic origin of the people of FYROM, Ambassador Achevska stated that "'''we are Slavs and we speak a Slav language.'''”
* On 24 February 1999, in an interview with the Ottawa Citizen, Gyordan Veselinov, FYROM's Ambassador to Canada:
"''We are not related to the northern Greeks who produced leaders like Philip and Alexander the Great. We are a '''Slav people''' and our language is closely related to Bulgarian.''" He also commented, “''<b>There is some confusion about the identity of the people of my country.</b>''"
I hope we're done with this naming issue. [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 16:58, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
::Interesting point. Just, there is one problem. Ljubica Achevska, the ambasador you mentioned is my aunt, sister in law of my father. She claims that she said that we are not the only ancestors of Alexander the Great and that there are several nations who have origin from there. Another thing she said is that we are mostly Slavs, but our (partly) Antique Macedonian origin can not be denied.
::Damn, I am so happy I am here to deny this LIE, LIE, LIE!!!
::Try something else Miskin. I agree that there are some (Macedonian) politicians who would say that we have nothing to do with the Antique Macedonians. But, POLITICIANS, just in order to calm the problem we have with the Greeks, so they won't make us problems with the international comunity.
::And one more thing. Why Wikipedia doesn't use the terms Bulgarian Slavs, Serbian Slavs, Croatian Slavs, Polish Slavs, Slovenian Slavs etc.? (With all my respect to the Serbians, Croatians, Polish and Slovenians. Bulgarians will get my respect when they stop daydreaming and realise that we are not their brothers... mostly we can be their far cousin)
::[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 17:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
:::If you are the ''ancestors'' of Alexander the Great, then either you are several millennia old or have a time machine. I presume you mean ''descendants''. And I presume that you are not claiming that each of you is individually descended from him.
:::As for the terms: we don't say, for example, "Serbian Slavs" or "Croatian Slavs" because there is no significant body of non-Slavs who claim to be "Serbs" or "Croats", so there is no confusion in using those words. That's all there is to it: it's a matter of language and avoiding ambiguity. -- [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 01:50, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
::::Yes, you are right. All we can be is descendants. Sorry for the wrong term, English is not my mother tongue. And Yes, non of us (Greek or Macedonian) is individually descended from Alexander. That was almost 2500 years ago. With so many mixings, resetelments, wars etc, noone can claim direct origin from someone who lived in the same teritory 2500 years ago. That is why I always say "at least partly", when talking about our non-Slavic part of the origin.
::::As far as I understood, Wikipedia uses Macedonian Slavs in order to avoid mixing us with the Antique Macedonians. Aren't the terms Macedonian and Antique Macedonian different enought? It is very easy to set the things in a way how when you search for the term "Macedonian", Wikipedia to take you on another page when you chose from 2 options: 1)Antique Macedonians and 2)nowdays Macedonians (concentrated mostly in Republic of Macedonia).
::::The [[Macedonian Slavs]] name is completely ignoring the non-Slavic part of our origin that we have (proved by genes researches). And, it is not the name that we accept. Everyone (except Greece and Cyprus) calls us Macedonians.
::::I agree that there should be difference between the present Macedonians and Antique Macedonians. I completely support that idea, because we are not the same and we (same as the Greeks) do not have the exclusive right over the term Macedonia. But, why you have to deny me and the other 2,5 million Macedonians the only name that we identify with (Macedonians)? '''Not very NPOV'''. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Jmabel, no one is confusing the modern Arabic speaking [[Egyptians]] with the builders of the [[Pyramids]], and yet the using of the term Macedonians could cause that confusion. Neither does the United Nations, the European Union, and every other relevant international institution, government (except Greece and Greek Cyprus), media outlet, encyclopedia (except MSN Encarta). The common word for referring to Macedonians is Macedonians, and this can be seen by Zocky's Google test. Please see the vast amount of neutrally provided evidence [[Talk:Macedonian_Slavs/Poll#Resources|here]].
::::Then again, how come the term "Macedonian Slavs" doesn't create a confusion with other Slavic speaking people inhabiting the region, such as Bulgarians and Serbians? Disambiguation is a great thing, but in this case the disambiguating term seems to seriously violate the [[NPOV]] policy, and a bunch of international documents guaranteeing self-identification human rights. It is quite obvious that "Macedonian Slavs" isn't the proper disambiguating term, in times when we have plenty of other options, such as: Macedonians (people), Macedonians (nationality), Macedonians (nation), and so on. (which are also accepted by some moderate Greeks, as well) --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 03:03, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
:Macedonians (nationality) or something like that might be acceptable '''in Wikipedia''', but not necessarily acceptable in real life. I view this problem as a big mess: the People X seem to have made up their minds to identify themselves by a term which should not be monopolized by them, even as a nationality. I once again bring up my comparison: I would not agree with Albanians calling themselves '''Illyrians''', even if they preferred that term. As for Wikipedia, we already had a vote. For People X, it is not a matter of their human rights, more a matter of their [[vanity]] (just as it would be vanity for Albanians to wish people to term them [[Illyrians]]). [[User:Decius|Decius]] 03:36, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
::Not at all, it is nothing to do with [[vanity]]. As far as I could see your nationality is Romanian. What would happen if the Humgarians decide that their history involves a part of the history that happened in Romania, so they decide to name their south part of the country "Romania" and they do the same to you, as the Greeks are doing to us?
::Macedonians '''did not decide''' to name themselves that way. There was no meeting (or voting) to that. It was a feeling that was developing for centuries. Feeling of belonding to some ethnicity. Macedonian, in this case.
::On the other side, that is what Wikipedia actually did. They named us [[Macedonian Slavs]] because someone '''decided''' to do so. They even organized a voting for '''our''' ethnicity and name. Isn't that kind of arogant?
::And how did anyone of you expected to be a fair vote, when there are more than 20 million Greeks around the world and just 2,5 million Macedonians? Especially when the internet usage in Greece is more than 50% and in Macedonia is about 10%.
::Think about it. Do you expect to change our feeling which was developing for centuries in one vote?
::Now, Wikipedia claims that there are "[[Macedonian Slavs]]" in Macedonia. Let's organize a new vote with a question: "How many of you feel [[Macedonian Slavs]]?" It will be interesting to see the results of that.
::When you mentioned the Albanians... have you ever met one? I am meeting them every single day, we have 450 000 of them living in Macedonia. They all feel that they have origin from the [[Illyrians]]. But the Illyrian teritory covers just 1/5 of the teritory where the Albanian live nowdays.
::On the other side, nowdays Macedonians (or, how you call us [[Macedonian Slavs]]) are strictly concentrated inside the borders of the region Macedonia.
::'''It is interesting to know that from more than 10 nations living in the region, only we are concentrated entirely in the teritory of the region Macedonia'''. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 15:42, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
:Yes, I'm Romanian, and I'm not 100% biased against the Slavic Macedonians. But for Macedonian Slavs to claim special descent (as many claim) from the ancient Macedonians is dishonest. Based on historical evidence, historical consensus, I would bet that the Slavic Macedonians have less ancient Macedonian genes than Greeks. The Slavic Macedonians released flawed genetic research a few years ago to try to claim otherwise, but their claims have been rejected by the genetic experts in the field. ---[[User:Decius|Tony Starks]]
== HLA Genes research ==
::::Guess what Decius... you would lose your money. The first and the only research of the HLA Genes of the Balkan region led by Spanish scientists showed that the genes caried by nowdays Macedonians (or Macedonian Slavs, like Wikipedia addresses us) are closely related to the genes of the oldest populations on the region of the mediteranian. Here is the link of the research: http://www.mymacedonia.net/links/email.htm
::::You can find several other links by google: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=macedonian+greek+HLA+genes
::::Read it well, think about it and all you who beleive that we are artificial project of Tito.
::::This is my answer to all your assimilation claims and doubts. You give me claims and nationalistic claims, and I give you scientific research of HLA genes (hope you know what HLA genes represent).
::::So, Decius, I hope you did not bet a lot of money. More researches will follow, you might lose everything you have. :) [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:36, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:If you are talking about this link:[http://www.mymacedonia.net/links/email.htm, you need another link, because that Slavo-Macedonian funded "genetic research" has been dismissed by the scientific community as totally lacking in scientific merit. Read this [http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v415/n6868/full/415115b_fs.html [[User:Decius|Decius]] 02:44, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:::Decius, the link that I specified is pro-Macedonian web page, that is clear. That is the first link that appears in google, because is very popular. And, the survey is very well organized. That is why I put it there. And, that is the reason why I put the other link to google, so anyone of you can pick which link he prefers. They all show the same survey. It lasted for several years and it finaly finished some 4-5 months ago. It is getting very good acceptance through the world, as you can see.
:::Yes, I agree, this is just a start in HLA genes research and it can not be a sure proof about the conections with the antique Macedonians. But, having on mind the intensiti of the survey and the number of DNA samples included, same as the leading '''neutral''' scientists (from Spain), it proves 2 things:
:::1)nowdays Macedonians (the ones Wikipedia names [[Macedonian Slavs]]) have older HLA genes than anyone else in the area of the region Macedonia. These genes are very similar to the ones of the other old Mediterinanian people. So, we are very nearly conected to some old people who lived in the area of the Mediterinanian sea which '''might be''' the Antient Macedonians '''or any other''' that lived in the same time in this area.
:::2)The modern Greeks have HLA genes which are far closer to the Sub-Saharan people, than to the ones in the Mediterinanian sea area. As far as I understood, only the people in the area of Athens have more Mediterinanian HLA genes than a regular modern Greek, but still less than average Macedonian (or [[Macedonian Slav]], as refferer to in Wikipedia). The ones who know about the HLA genes, woulc understand that this does not say that the modern Greeks have nothing to do with the old Greeks, but it says that they have more to do with the old Sub-Saharan tribes than with anyone that lived in the area of the Mediterinanian sea in the time before Jesus.
:::In order to understand this survey well, please first read what HLA genes are and their importance. Pick the link that suits you the most from http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=hla+genes
:::Of course, this survey can not be a 100% proof, but is '''far far more acurate''' than any document or historical claim. '''You can always rewrite the history, but you can not change your genes'''.
:::Again, if you read more about the HLA genes, they are expected to significantly change the history as we know it, as soon as the methods get advanced and the surveys get bigger in number. The only problem is that every survey takes a lot of time and money. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 17:23, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:And now about language: are there any words that are found only in the [[Macedonian language]] that any credible linguist has said, "This word is from the ancient Macedonians" (and the claim being accepted by general linguists). If not, you can see why some people cannot accept the term Macedonian to be applied to the Slavic Macedonians. [[User:Decius|Decius]] 00:08, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:::I hope you know that there are just couple of hundred words known from the Antique Macedonian Language. And that is from the period when they already started accepting the Hellenic culture.
:::And even with so few words, there are many words in the new Macedonian language similar to the Antique Macedonian language.
:::I won't write here a lot of text, I will just link you so you can see by yourself. When you take all the examples, search for similarities between the nowday Greek language and the Antique Macedonian. You will see that actually, both (nowday Greek and nowday Macedonian) have respectative number of words that are similar to the ones of the Antique Macedonian.
:::So, here is a very nice link:
http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/ConciseMacedonia/similarities.html. Try to read it all. It is quite long because there are many interesting points.
:::One more thing. Why you never mentioned the Antique Macedonian names. How many times you heared about some Greek people with same (or similar) name as the antient Macedonian kings?
:::Republic of Macedonia is completely full with Alexandar's, Philip's, Macedonka's etc. Not to mention that Greeks use all these names with 's' on the end of the name. All the rest of the world uses the forms of these names without 's', same form used in the nowdays Macedonian language. [[User:62.162.199.17|62.162.199.17]] 03:13, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:And actually, Albania covers most of the territory of the original Illyria (which did not include Dalmatia, Pannonia, Dardania, etc.). You are thinking about the Roman Province of Illyria, which was gigantic and included most of the Balkans at one time. [[User:Decius|Decius]] 00:13, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:::No, I was not talking about the Roman Illyria province. I was talking about the old Illyrian teritory and saying that the teritories populated with Albanians in present days are much, much larger than the original Illyrian teritory. [[User:62.162.199.17|62.162.199.17]] 03:13, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:I didn't erase any of your posts, so don't erase any of mine. Whatever connection I may have with "Greece or Bulgaria" does not change the fact that I am not 100% biased. Your "genetic research link" that you posted above presented research that has rightfully been dismissed by the genetic specialists. Your new link about ancient Macedonian elements in modern Macedonian is not from a linguistic source, and I'm sure linguists would reject 99% of it. It even includes Thracian and Illyrian elements as "Ancient Macedonian": ''Myrcinus'' (''Murkinos'') was a [[Thracian]] city of the [[Edonians]], not a Macedonian name [http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0200&layout=&loc=4.107]. Pittacus was also Thracian [http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0200&layout=&loc=4.107] [http://classicpersuasion.org/pw/diogenes/dlpittacus.htm], Mantyes was [[Paionian]] [http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0126&layout=&loc=5.12], Plator is [[Illyrian]] (not only are all three of the gentlemen named ''Plator'' in this link of Illyrian ethnicity [http://www.ancientlibrary.com/smith-bio/2738.html], but John Wilkes in his book ''The Illyrians'' quotes experts on [[onomastics]] who affirm it is Illyrian, because it is found almost always among Illyrians and among [[Delmatae]], [[Liburnians]]), etc. etc. There are errors throughout the text. [[User:Decius|Decius]] 04:05, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:::The text that I gave you, on the link above is taken from a Russian book from the 1960s. This issue is very popular lately and just in last 10 years there are more than 7 lingistic books that work on it. 3 of them are from Macedonian linguists, but the other 4 are from Chech, Russian and 2 Polish linguists.
:::All words given as example in the text are a part of the lexicon of [[Hesychius of Alexandria]], or words that could be found on the Antient Macedonian Coins (from which Republic of Macedonia possess significant part). Some of them were maybe used also in the Thracian or Illyrian language, but they can be found in the Antient Macedonian too. Same as you can find the word "antena" in several new languages with different origin. Again, let me repeat that there are just about 500-700 words that are seen as a part of the Antient Macedonian language, but do not forget that all those words can be found in Greek books and lexicons (the Greek culture was superior in that time), which might mean that their original transcription is changed to be able to write them using the Greek alphabet and rules. Another thing that you should not forget is the enormous difference between the old Greek and the new Greek language. My wife has a language school here in Skopje and I was able to get many information from her employee, a Greek teacher from Greek nationality. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 17:23, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Hmmm, I just love it Greece's envious and poor neighbours have an opinion on the Greek language. I remember running into a Slavo-Macedonian article which explained how [[Koine Greek]] is actually '''not''' a Greek dialect... :D Something tells me that Strebinski is Paletakis from [[Talk:Macedonian Slavs]]. Same shit, different day. [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 03:34, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
::::::I (i_sterbinski) joined Wikipedia just some time ago, not more than 10-15 days ago. You can see that from many mistakes that I have made, including spamming, using caps instead of bold etc.
::::::And one more thing. Maybe your neighboors are poor, but there is nothing to be envious about. All the world is laughting at you when trying to prove that everything on this world is Greek. Have you wached "My big,. fat Greek wedding"? That is how you are. And not to forget, the author of that movie is Greek woman.
::::::I really would not like to be you. Sorry. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 00:26, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
Yeah the world is laughing at us because of some comedy (which is actually pro-greek) and nobody's laughing at you who have the nerve to want to call your nation "Macedonian"? :) Of course you're not jealous, none of you is, keep saying that over and over and one day you might even believe it. What the hell, you might even believe that you're a Macedonian... [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 01:21, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:If anybody thinks this debate is irrelevant to Romanians and Aromanians, read this quote, from Andre Du Nay ''History of the Romanian language'' (1996):
::"''The fact that Romanian belongs to the Balkan languages of the first grade can only be explained if one considers that they lived in (parts of) Macedonia and adjacent areas."''
:::I have heard of that and personaly, I agree. Once I even read some article about the origin and similarities between the modern Romanians and modern Macedonians. The book was on modern Croatian language, so I didn't understand everything in it. This is ocourse something that is not proved, but it is interesting point and something that we should not ignore. I will repeat again, the genes researches might prove many things in the future, including this. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 17:23, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:Now, I don't necessarily agree with Du Nay, but if he's right, I would not want another people to monopolize the name ''Macedonian''. ---[[User:Decius|Decius]] 06:03, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:::Only people that monopolize the name Macedonia are the Greeks. Noone of us ever claimed that the name Macedonia belongs only to us, modern Macedonians. The history of the region is so complicated that noone can ever think of monopolizing that name. But that does not mean that someone has a right to change my identity with a vote. Identity is something that you can not choose, it is a feeling that develops for centuries. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 17:23, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
::Décie, I don't know why you're even bothering to try to reason with a [[macadamia nut]].--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 07:30, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Define "reasoning of a Macedonian nut". Does that mean the "Macedonian nut" to accept to artificially change his name and to give you an exclusive right over the term Macedonia?
::::And, when you already got a part in this conversation, explain why Greece runned away 300000 Macedonians and 100000 Bulgarians from Greece during the last 50 years, people that are still not alowed to enter Greece? Why did you burn my grandfathers house and shoot at him?
::::[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 17:23, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:::::Because I didn't like his face. What are you gonna do about it?--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 18:31, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
::::::What??? Theathenae? Is that a response??? I am calling the admin to react on this. [[User:Ivica83|Ivica83]] 19:15, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
::'''Please people, give attention to this this comment of Theathenae above. This is how we aretreated by the Greeks. This is happening for centuries and it seems that noone cares. Nationalist like Theathenae and VMORO are the ones that are responsible of the assimilation texts here on Wikipedia and want to keep them.'''
::'''And, Theathenae, what will I do about it? I would be glad explaining you that, but only in private. Wikipedia is not a place for idiotic conversations.'''
::'''It will be interesting when you will be forced to pay compensations for all the lands that you stole. There is already law suit in front of the European court for that. And does not seem very good for you, kid'''. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 00:48, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
:::ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ.--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 06:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
:You might be right. He'll probably just come back and make accusations instead of addressing my simple, honest question (I actually am asking you this): '''what words are there in the [[Macedonian language]], that credible linguists have stated are words from the ancient Macedonians'''? If there are none, then all the People X should think about what that implies. That link you provided that lists the spurious similarities is not scientific, nor does it present information that is accepted by any specialists in the field. One of the few correct items in the list is that Brygian ([[Phrygian language|Phrygian]]) ''Zemela'' is cognate to Slavic Macedonian ''zemja'' (dial. ''zemla''): this is correct, but that is a Phrygian, not ancient Macedonian, [[cognate]] (it is also found in all [[Slavic languages]]). I am not asking for [[cognates]], I'm asking for words that are considered to be ''from'' the ancient Macedonians (a cognate is something totally different and does not concern us here). [[User:Decius|Decius]] 12:29, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
::::I already told you about this above. All words in that list are in that lexicon. And if you anything about linguistic, '''you would know that you can not ever talk about antient origin of some language''' (2500 years difference). Maybe only for the Basque and the Georgian language. You can only talk about words, one by one. Read something more, search, ask... The modern Macedonian language is definitly of Slavic origin, but there are many words that have origin from some of the 500-700 known words of the Antique Macedonian language. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 17:23, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:You brought [[opinions|claims]] here, not [[facts]]. You brought no ancient Macedonian words and no proof that the People X have "the most" ancient Macedonian genes. Just claims. [[User:Decius|Decius]] 13:06, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:::After this I seriously doubt your neutrality. I never claimed that we, '''Macedonians (Not people X)''' have most of genes from Antique Macedonians. I was saying that several nations in the region mixed with those people and have part of their genes. And it is more than obvious that you have no idea what HLA genes are. I know about 2 more researches like that (one of them involving a Greek scientist) that have similar results, but are still not publicated. Modern science is not based on claims, only on facts. And the facts already started ariving and they will keep ariving.
:::People beleived for centuries that Ramzes was the ones who runned the Jews away from Egypt. But, actually, latter it was proven that Ramzes II has nothing to do with that.
:::Again, '''no one''' of us (Greeks or Macedonians) can claim exclusive rights over the term Macedonia, but you can not take my ethnicity and culture away (which again, no one claims is 100% conected with the Antuque Macedonians). [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 17:23, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
::Okay Isterbinski. It would be okay with me if Wikipedia termed the People X as Macedonians (nationality) or something similar, but this will always be controversial. However, the fact is that you have brought no evidence for Slavic Macedonians having more ancient Macedonian genes than other people in the area, and no evidence of even one language-element having passed directly from the ancient Macedonians to the Slavic Macedonians. [[User:Decius|Alexandru]] 22:55, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Thank you. I feel the same way. Actually, I think that the complete issue between the nowday Macedonians and Greeks is senceless, because it appeared only because of the nationalistic minds in both of the countries. Well educated normal person in modern Macedonia or Greece know that non of us can have exclusivity over the Antique Macedonia.
::::The real problem is between the Bulgarians and nowdays Macedonians, because they ignore the Macedonian nationality, language and culture for centuries, including now, in the 21st century.
::::And yes, I am aware that the term Macedonia involves far too many sensitive points. That will make it forever contraversial.
::::Some nationalistic Macedonians are quite not resonable, claiming our exclusivity over the term Macedonia. But, in real world it is not that way. Even if some day someone manages to prove that the nowdays Macedonians are exclusive and only ancestors of the Antique Macedonians, even them we can not have the exclusivity over that term. Simply, that time involves 25 centuries, far too much time. And not to forget that the modern nations did not formed before 15th century (A fact that makes half of this conversation on this discusion page completely irelevant). [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 00:48, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
:I agree that the Slavic Macedonians can claim some genetic descent (as numerous others can) and also symbolic ancestry, but where I draw the line is at the language. I have yet to see an actual linguistic source affirm any connection. I'm not saying "there is absolutely no linguistic element that has transferred from ancient Macedonians to modern Slavic Macedonians"---though this is probably the case. This website [http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/ConciseMacedonia/similarities.html is spurious and erroneous, point blank. Those names were gathered not from [[Talk:Ancient_Macedonian_language#.E1.BC.A9.CF.83.CF.8D.CF.87.CE.B9.CE.BF.CF.82.2C_.CE.B3.CF.81.CE.B1.CE.BC.CE.BC.CE.B1.CF.84.CE.B9.CE.BA.E1.BD.B8.CF.82_.E1.BC.88.CE.BB.CE.B5.CE.BE.CE.B1.CE.BD.CE.B4.CF.81.CE.B5.CF.8D.CF.82:_A-.CE.A9|Hesychius]], but gathered haphazardly from various sources, and many of those names (including most of the ones I mentioned) are not even attested among the [[ancient Macedonians]]. I'm going to detail its blatant errors on another page in the future. Though we agree on other points, there is no agreement here and it is not a good sign that you believe such pseudo-scholarly internet sites. [[User:Decius|Alexandru]] 04:47, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
:::I agree that many of the things on that web cite are too nationalistic and not always true. I never denied that. On the other hand, there are many other that have a completely reasonable aproach and are supported by the scientific world, especially in last 20 years.
:::I have to point out that I am not a linguist. So, when the language is concerned, I don't know too much. I just know that the same information (concerning the nowdays Macedonian versus the Antique Macedonian language) can be found in a linguistic book by some Russian guy. I read that book some 3-4 years ago and I don't remeber its name, or the name of the author, but I know that many words mentioned in that book are mentioned on the web page I posted here. I repeat, many, but I can not claim that they were all. Another thing that I am sure about that there are at least 7 linguistic books concerning this issue, and more than half are from non-Macedonian authors.
:::I repeat. I am not linguist, so I leave this to someone more informed. All I know that this issue is a subject to several books and researches. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:16, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
:There is '''no''' genetic evidence that the Slavic Macedonians have more ancient Macedonian genes than other people in the area. The Slavic Macedonians most likely (affirmed by historians, based on historical evidence) absorbed a Latinized and/or Hellenized population. It is not a "nationalist claim" that Slavs arrived in Macedonia around the 7th Century AD (very unlikely any ancient Macedonian speakers were still around then). So Macedonian genes would have come from Romanized and/or Hellenized Macedonians in just about all cases (again not "a nationalist claim", but the historical consensus, supported by the evidence; if somebody wants to review the evidence or the evidence ''ex silentio'', they can research and find it). [[User:Decius|Alexandru]] 05:07, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
:::The research was involving selevaral nations, including a Macedonian scientist. The research involves a Spanish scientist that lives in Greece for more than 30 years too. Lets please note that this is a officially publicated and suported research.
:::Another thing that I want to note is that it only covers the HLA genes and their presence. How they appeared in some nation, we can always only guess.
:::Dacius, I have to point out that the research says the HLA Mediterinanian genes are dominant in our genes. On the other hand, the Slavic gene is much less seen in the nowdays Macedonians and we have it less than any other Slavic nation living in the area, including the Bulgarians.
:::The Slavic HLA gene is of same "power" as the Mediterinanian. The research did not assume any conclusion why we have more Mediterinanian than Slavic gene and I won't dare to predict. More Researches will follow, so sooner or latter we will see are we (and how much) or we are not at all connected with the Antique Macedonians, or any other tribe living in the area in the time before Crist.
:::Whatever will be the conclusion, I will be glad when it happens. It is better to know am I connected to the Antique Macedonians at all and if yes, how much is that, than having endless discutions on pages like this one about my origin. Now, especially after this research, I can not just accept that I am Slavic. Aldough, beeing just Slavic will solve many problems to my country that we have with Greece, I will rather wait for the truth. I hope you understand what I am talking about.
:::Anyway, I would like to repeat something. Whatever result appears at the end, even if we are 60% Antique Macedonians and 40% Slavic, Macedonians '''can not''' have the exclusive right to use the term Macedonia. '''No one can'''. Agree? [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:16, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
:Yes I agree on that last point. [[User:Decius|Alexandru]] 02:48, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
::I would like to thank Istirbinski for finally publishing the data that the present-day Macedonian Slavs have 60% East Mediterranean genes (which he mistakenly attributes to the Ancient Macedonians). Darling, Bulgarians have exactly 60% East Mediterranean genes, as well (see [ http://www.racialcompact.com/nordishrace.html ]), no better proof that we are the same people can ever be provided:-))))))). [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 07:49, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
::::Darling, if you know anything about biology and genes, you will know what difference is there between HLA genes and genes in general.
::::Actually, the exact research you linked here proves that Macedonians and Bulgarians have nothing in common.
::::Acording to the research you provided, Macedonians have:
::::75% Dinaric, 10% West Mediterranean (most common on the coast), 10% Noric and 5% Neo-Danubian (most common in the north) = 15% periphery Nordish types.
::::Acording to the same research, Bulgarians have:
::::60% East Mediterranean, 15% Alpine, 15% Dinaric, 5% Turanid, 5% Nordish.
::::As you can see, your research shows exacly the oposite from your claims: Bulgarians and Macedonians have '''very little''' in common.
::::On the other hand, the research I linked is strictly about the HLA genes. This technique is very new and it is expected to change the world history (it already started). So, before getting a smile on your face, read first the research that you linked well, and then read and learn well about the uniqueness of the HLA genes, and then read the research I linked. Sorry to disapoint you. :)) [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 01:40, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
:::East Mediterranean? So, by the decidedly ''non''-Slavic ''Igor Sterbinski'''s own admission, the "Macedonians" and Bulgars are really Arabs and the Greeks are really "sub-Saharan savages", to quote from a [[macadamia nut]] nationalist website where I first encountered this racist excrement disguised as a "scientific" study.--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 08:52, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
:::I will sugest same to you. First learn what is West and East Mediterinanian, and learn what is HLA genes. According to the research I linked, Macedonians are closely linked to other old (before Crist) ethnicities and tribes that lived in Mediterinanian Europe. If you read the survey well, the final result proves that the people that we have origin from arived on the region of Macedonia 2000 years BC. I am not claiming they were the Antique Macedonians. And the same survey found Slavic genes in the Macedonians, but in much lower percent.
:::On the other hand, the nowday Greeks are closely conected with the Ethiopia's, Sudan's and West Africa's people. This does not deny the close connection between the old Greeks and new Greeks. It actually proves that they were closely related, but (according to this research) the new Greeks are mixure between the old Greeks and Sub-Saharans.
:::Theathenae, if you read the survey well, you could notice that there is a big posibility of mixing between the old Greeks and the Slavs (the ones that we have origin from), but before the Greeks started mixing with the Sub-Saharans. So, Theathenae, maybe we are even very far cousins. :))
:::Many surveys about HLA genes are to follow, Theathenae, and till they arive I will not claim anything. But it does not look good for you, at least not for now. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 01:40, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
::::How exactly does it not look good for me? I personally see nothing but good in having sub-Saharan genes: great tans, big dicks, and the kind of physical prowess you "whiteys" can only dream of. Not to mention that it was those same sub-Saharan mongrels that gave birth to Western civilisation. I'm afraid it's going to take a lot more than "exposing" the Greeks as "African savages" to justify your claim to Macedonia. You're going to have to try ''much'' harder than that. Next!--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 05:22, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
::::::I think this was the best answer on this discusion page ever (the part about the big dics and prowess). :))) Respect to you, Theathenae.
::::::Just, I got little disapointed with the second part of your answer. I never said any of those words, Theathenae. And, if you read my comments well you would know that the sub-Saharan genes in the Greeks do not show that they are not connected with the old Greeks. The connection between the old and new Greeks is too obvious and can not be denied.
:::::: And, let me repeat again. No matter of the past, the whole region of Macedonia, including the Macedonian name '''can not''' be monopolized by any of us nowdays Macedonians and Greeks.
::::::Personally, I beleived since ever that the issues we have about the name Macedonia can be solved much easier than it seems. The non-nationalists from both sides (Greek and Macedonian) are aware that no one of us can have exclusive rights on the name of Macedonia and the history which is involved. Actually, I can bet that this issue will be solved in next few years.
::::::I think more sensitive issue is the problem with the nowdays Macedonians who have origin from Greece and don't live there anymore. But, I hope that our goverments will be smart enought to get over this problem too.
::::::We both know that all the problems we have are political and historical. Personally, I do not beleive that the people that live in Macedonia or Greece have problems between them. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 00:16, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
:I can vouch for my big dick (no bluff) and a fair amount of physical prowess (here I may be bluffing a bit), but the tan missed me. [[User:Decius|Alexandru]] 05:38, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
::Well you ''are'' half Greek, if I recall correctly. ;)--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 05:46, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Decius, you don't expect us to beleive that. You will have to post a pic or something. :))) Just kidding, please do not introduce us with the "monster".
::::Just, it was interesting to know that you are half Greek. It seemed that your comments are too personal and I could not beleive I hear them from a Romanian. But, that is no problem at all. I think we had quite intereting discusion here and we both have one more positive experience. I am glad that '''non''' of us took a nationalistic aproach to this discusion.
:Yes I. Sterbinski, I have kept my comments as polite as possible in this dispute, and I'll continue to do so. I'm not exactly a "biased" person. In articles, when I see "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia", I sometimes change it to "Republic of Macedonia" (see history [[Dardania (Europe)]] article), even though I don't "agree", but that is Wiki policy. I guess I have "mixed feelings" here. [[User:Decius|Lord Marshal]] 02:45, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Quite fair. I wish Greece and everyone else can understand that Macedonia (Republic of Macedonia) do not have any teritorial claims for some Greek teritory. As you know, the cooperation between the 2 countries is quite good.
::::I agree that there are some nationalists in Macedonia who would like to see Aegean part of Macedonia back in Macedonia, but those people are highly isolated and they do not have enought support.
::::After the problem we had with the Albanians which live in Macedonia in 2001st, we realise that nationalism has to be left back in the past. But, in the same time no one of us is prepared to tolerate if someone ignores us or denies our existance.
::::I personaly am an optimist about the issue we have with Greece. I just hope that the politicians on both sides will not include nationalistic aproach to the issue in their election speaches, because we should work on relaksing the crowd, not on fireing it up. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 00:38, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:The way the study is phrased in the links [http://www.makedonika.org/processpaid.aspcontentid=ti.2001.pdf (and the Macedonian Slav names that sponsored it, K. Dimitroski, M. Blagoevska, V. Zdravkovska, not just Spanish names there) leaves no doubt that it is not ''quite'' science. This kind of research is easily skewed or even inherently flawed (for example, I recall wide genetic samples used in the 1990's to "prove" a version of [[Out of Africa|OOA]] theory that have since been discarded as flawed, though once hailed as "proof" by some). But even ''if'' the research is valid, every sensible person here realizes that the "East Mediterranean" element in '''Macedonians Slavs and [[Bulgarians]]''' could as well have come from anybody from the [[Turks]] to the ancient [[Thracians]]. Putzger's 1905 map below shows heavy Turkish settlement in Macedonia (and some in Crete) for example. [[User:Decius|Alexandru]] 10:58, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
:::Alexandru, the Turks have their origin from Central Asia, or maybe even Mongolia, but they have nothing to do with the old Mediterinanians (we are talking about the time from 2000BC till Crist, and Turks arived in Minor Asia in the 14th century). Thracians might be the reason, but very unluckily, because they have far older genes than the people we are looking for. And, their HLA genes are in the group of Indo-European, not Mediterinanian.
:::I sugest you to read the survey well. It seems to me like you only read the conclusion, nothing else.
:::By the way, '''7 of 10 authors are non-Macedonians''', including a Spanish scientist that lives in Greece for more than 30 years. It is important to mention that the other scientist involved are of so called "neutral nations".
:::The 3 Macedonians involved were '''not sponsors'''. They are respected doctors from the Transfusiology and Tissue Department from Skopje and they were part of the team that worked on the survey. As a matter of fact, they were not included in the analisis of the samples (if anyone understands Macedonian, I can find you an interview with K. Dimitroski for a Skopje newspaper, but which is owned by German publishers).
:::On the other hand, at the end of the survey you can find a list of '''33 references by authors of many different nationalities, but non of them Macedonian'''.
:::And please, anyone else who want to coment on this issue, first read what HLA genes represent, their importance, and please read the research completely.
:::At the end just to mention that this research was officially publicated, but never denied or doubted by anyone (except you guys, the "respected scientist of world class"). [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 01:40, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
::I can't really answer where the East Mediterranean genes come from - they can be from the Thracians/Dacians, they can be from earlier mixture of the Eastern Southern Slavs with Iranian tribes, they can also be a result of the Ottoman domination. Not directly from the Turks, though, who were Turanoid, but from the heterogenous population of Anatolia which was Islamized and Turkified even before the formation of the Ottoman Sultanate. Or may be all three. But don't stake too much on the Turkish presence, Decius. The presence of East Mediterranean genes is strong even in the region of Sofia which had practically no Turkish settlements during the centuries of Ottoman rule. On the other hand, it is almost certain that a large number of Pechenegs settled there in the 11th century and were assimilated by the Bulgarians. Btw, why do you use this other name, Alexandru? [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 17:56, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:::Again, read first before you start talking senceless things. You are constantly talking about the period that is 30 centuries after the one the research talks about. Can anyone who knows '''anything''' from this issue read the survey and post his comments, please?
:::And again: the general characteristics of the genes (that you are talking about) are highly influenced by the "power" of the genes of specific ethnicities. But, HLA genes (the ones that I am talking about) are not influenced by this or similar problems. So, HLA genes research is a relatively new technique and has very little to do with general genes research. Make difference guys.
[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 01:40, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
:In fact, if one reads VMORO's Nordish link, it states that Romanians are 25% East Mediterranean, and that this element is mostly along the coast. Note that Turks in Romania were and are mostly ''along the coast''. The Turkish factor appears in all these cases, including Crete, and the conclusion is obvious---there were hardly any "ancient Macedonians" in [[Scythia Minor]]. [[User:Decius|Alexandru]] 12:05, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
:::2 things:
:::1) I never claimed that this survey proves that I have origin from the Antient Macedonians. It is possible, but not sure.
:::2)'''Again, make difference betweem regular genes researches and HLA genes researches. Read about it, you will see how different they are.''' [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 01:40, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
:Linking genes with national identities is dangerous. I knew about that HLA genes research all about it, but frankly, I don't believe it proves anything. That is why I have never used as it an argument. The involvement of the Macedonian crew in it, is ''indeed suspicious'' to me. The one thing positive that HLA genetic research proved, is, in my opinion, that the national "purity" of modern nations is, and has always been, a ''myth''.
:::I agree. There is '''no national purity in any nation in the world'''. One example... I am married with a Mexican, a country which is on the other side of the world. And I can bet that anyone of us knows at least some person married to someone belonding to different ethnicity. Just imagine how many cases like that were there in 40 centuries. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 01:40, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
:Now, what is really dangerous in it, are indeed, the racist conclusions drawn from it "Oh, my nation is more pure than your Sub-saharan tribe". (So Theathenae, that is indeed a racist statement, but I'm still confused why you dislike our faces so much). Such genetic researches or sometimes quasiresearches are always followed by ''racist'' sentiments, although they might not be motivated by such sentiments. Just see what the site that VMORO has provided stand for: ''Essays on a new concept of racial relations that promotes the continued existence, independence and legitimate rights and interests of all races, providing a preservationist alternative to the racially destructive consequences of multiracialism''. '''Destructive consequences of multiracialism?!'''
:Of course, there is this new "ethical racism" (preservation of all races), that tries to avoid (in my opinion), the obvious link, between these guys and Hitler's ideas, but on the site, there are mostly concerns why the "Nordic race" is the one dissapearing. How "serious" these guys are, you can see from [http://www.racialcompact.com/partitionmap.html|this map for racial preservation of the US]. The website's list of "Estimated percentage genes of modern nations" is composed from god knows what sources. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 15:37, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
::What bothers me more than anything is uncouth and underdeveloped Balkanians thinking they are somehow better than the Ethiopians, heirs to a great civilisation and a proud African nation never colonised by Europeans. If I ''am'' sub-Saharan, I am fucking proud of it! Watch me as I contaminate your beloved pristine white Egejska Makedonija with my dirty African genes...--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 19:38, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
:::I am not better than the Ethiopians. Non of us here is. I never said anything racist. All my respect to everyone, no matter of their nationality.
:::This is just a pure discusion and (at least) I don't have anything against you all, no matter Greek, Bulgarian, Romanian, Serbian or anyone else. As a matter of fact, I have Macedonian, Greek and Ukrainian origin. I am married to a Mexican and I have close family and friend to at least 5 other countries.
:::We are all human. Naturaly, we all need to belong to some group. So, that is why we have our groups (nations, as we call them now). And it is normal for any of us here to deffend his group.
:::But, I beleive that as soon as we discover any alien life forms on some planet, that are capable for beeing our rivals, the only important thing will be to be a human, no matter of the nationality.
:::I know that someone will give now some arogant comment on this, but that is how I really feel. Sometimes I can get mad at some of you, but it is just because I feel ofended. Probably I even ofended some of you here.
:::Peace to all of you. This issues we have, sooner or latter we will solve them, no matter will that be with HLA genes researches or any other method. And no matter of the result. Just, lets try to solve them peacefully and to stop the stupid Balkan tradition to have at least one major war in every 50 years.
:::Maybe it is unadequate to say this here, but I heared from some US citizen (friend of my uncle) that the Balkan is an ashole of the world and we all (the counties around) are its hemoroids. Damn it, I hated him after this. But, unfortunatelly, he is right. :(( [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 01:40, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
:We're all going kind of off-topic with this, but some last points, assuming the genetic research is not flawed. If they define East Mediterranean as genes found in and around [[Anatolia]], then I don't see anything "Macedonian" about those genes. They are [[Anatolian]] genes. Crete was once populated by [[Leleges]] according to Herodotus, and the [[Minoan language]] has been compared to the [[Anatolian languages]]. The Turks absorbed the Anatolian peoples and would have transmitted a lot (but not all) of the East Mediterranean genes into Europe.
:::The same genes can be found in the Spanish people. And the Turks can not be the transmiters, because they appeared in the area about 20-30 centuries after the people we are looking for. Acording to the sturcture of the HLA genes that appeared in the research (showed in the tables in the research), we are looking for someone who was on the are of modern Balkany, Italy, Spain, Senegal (very unlickely) or Portugal. Again, me or you making wild guesses can not change anything. The research does not claim any conection between the nowdays Macedonians and Antique Macedonians. It only confirms it is posible, but the same thing was already claimed before. It will take at least 10 more years and at least 3-4 intensive researches to make this issue more clear. But, no one of us can predict the final results. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 00:16, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
:As for the "sub-Saharan genes": they would be older than the East Mediterranean genes in that area, not younger. The land of Greece has a long history, and it was once populated by various hominid forms (fossils have been found, etc.) and later by various types of people. The sub-Saharan would probably be an ancient substratum, older than the Pelasgians, then the Greeks and Macedonians came on top of these older inhabitants. That's what it seems like. Ancient Macedonians would also have had "sub-Saharan genes". [[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 02:23, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
::::That would be very unlickely. The research says that the sub-Saharan gene in Greeks "entered" latter, most possibly after Crist. The research does not say this, but maybe the Greeks that came from Minor Asia brought it. But, this is just a wild guess. As I said before, more research will come, so them we can talk more about it. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 00:16, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
:I. Sterbinski, it is not very unlikely. The dubious (it is dubious) report itself says, "The conclusion is that part of the Greek genetic pool may be sub-Saharan and that the admixture has occured at an uncertain but ancient time." I agree. If it was from Egyptian Greeks after Christ, it should not be so sub-Saharan, because the majority of Egyptians were not of the sub-Saharan type. ---[[User:Decius|Lord Marshal Alexandru]] 01:52, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
:::I would like to point out that bringing that survey in this discusions was not ment for denying anything Greek or what the Greeks feel as Greek. There were 2 things I wanted to point out:
:::1) The nowdays Macedonians are of mixed origin (not just Slavic), like some people here claim.
:::2) The nowdays Macedonians have different genetical structure than any other nation in the region of the Balkany.
:::Another thing that you say that the research is dubious, but no one till now ever doubted it from the scientifical point of view. To build strong conclusions, more researches are needed and much more work. The only conclusions that are certain are the ones given above. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 00:49, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:The "research" has been rejected by the experts in the field, because it is flawed. I don't know why you are even still talking about it. [[User:Decius|Decius]] 01:29, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::You are talking about a wrong researcvh. See bellow. There are several proofs of how mistaken you are. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 06:52, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
===Genetic NPOV===
'''Can anyone tell me what are we discussing about here?''' As I recall, '''in this discussion''', nobody claimed that the HLA genes research was somehow a ''definite proof'' that the modern Macedonians (nationality) are in genetical continuity with the Ancient Macedonians, nor does the research give that kind of proof, since this is a really new method in determining historical contingency, and I guess it is not fully accepted as relevant in the scientific community . (Note that the claim of some "uncouth and underdeveloped Balkanians" about the "Greek sub-saharan inferiority" was not brought as an argument by anyone participating in this discussion, therefore its deconstruction is a ''waste of time'').
The HLA genes research claims that the East Mediterranean genes which are to be found in modern Macedonians, are ''older'' than than those which can be found in Greeks. From that point on we can either:
:1)Refuse its conclusions (HLA genes research is not to be mentioned in the article)
:2)Accept its conclusions (HLA genes research is to be mentioned in the article)
If we do accept it as relevant to the article, then we must not ''speculate'' about its contents. Tony Starks (:D) as far as I know, you are speculating. "''If they define East Mediterranean as genes found in and around [[Anatolia]]''" is speculating, by definition. "''Ancient Macedonians would also have had "sub-Saharan genes"''", is also a speculation, because that claim is not supported by any other genetical or historical research. Note that Jews also have "East Mediterranean" genes, so you are actually claiming that Greeks are "older" than Jews. Also note that the same research is used by the Lebanese to claim ancestry from the Phoenicians - [[http://phoenicia.org/genetics.html]].
''If'' we include the HLA genes research in the article, then we must accept that it ''claims'' that ''Macedonians (nationality) belong to an "older" genetical substratum than modern Greeks, same as the Jews, French, Italians etc., and that, probably Macedonians (nationality) are genetically linked with the Ancient Macedonians'' and note that this research is used by some ''Macedonian and Lebanese nationalists as a definite proof for their Ancient Macedonian and Phoenician ancestry, respectably''. (that they, those nationalists ''claim'' so, is ''verifiable''). The Greek arguments (from the reaction of the nationalists to the response of the scientists and historians) to the research must be supported by citing sources which can be found outside this discussion.(that is something that the [[NPOV]] policy requires, [[cite your sources]]).
IMHO, this genetical data, could be included with the necessary explanation that it this is a really new method, and it is not fully accepted in the scientific community.
Here's the research in full. [http://www.makedonika.org/processpaid.aspcontentid=ti.2001.pdf]
--[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 22:04, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
::::This research might result in many conclusions. But one of them is sure... it shows clearly that we are have older origin than Slavic and it shows that we have different genetic structure than any other nation in the area. I know that after this VMORO will post his comment here trying to deny me, but you can not deny the blood and genes that are inside me. As I said, more researches will follow, so let's see. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 00:16, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
:The report should not be used in the article unless its dubious interpretation is specified. If this was an issue concerning Jews, not Greeks, everybody would agree it is anti-Semitic in tone and not to be given much credit ("The sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks", as the report says; give me a break; if someone thinks that report is not politically motivated, tainted, and dubious, then that someone is naive). ---[[User:Decius|Lord Marshal Alexandru]] 01:52, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Look, the research is deffinitly not anti-Greek. The research never doubts the Greek origin from the antient Greeks. It only gives another link in their origin (sub-Saharan), but does not denies the other links.
::::The ones that know more about the genetic researches know that bigger mixure of genes results in more sophisticated speciments.
::::And, it is '''nonsence''' to claim that the research is politicaly motivated. The research involves 70% of scientists of Spanish nationality (one of them having also Greek nationality). Their team already started the research when the other 3 scientist got involved, mostly in getting tissue and blood samples. As you know, Spain is Greek partner in the European union. Why would they support Macedonia over Greece?
::::Another interesting point is that the research was not mentioned or used by any of the Macedonian political parties, including the most nationalistic ones. If they wanted, they could use it to get political points, claiming that this research shows our connection with the antique Macedonians. But they '''never''' did that.
::::I don't think that me, Dacius, VMORO or anyone else here has a right to deny this research, because we are talking about a publicaly presented and quite popular research, publicated in several scientifical magazines, with international team of genetical scientists behing it and, the most important... '''never denied research''', by anyone. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 01:19, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:And I repeat that there is no way yet to tell whether the ancient Macedonians had such a high percentage of "East Mediterranean" (actually, probably [[Anatolian]]) genes, so it is not proof of ancient Macedonian genes, as we've all admitted. [[User:Decius|Lord Marshal Alexandru]] 01:58, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
:::No one ever said that it is prove for our antient Macedonian origin. But it is sure that it is not Anatolian (read the survey, you will see why). Please stop trying to desinform the people with your claims that those genes can come from everyone else except antique Macedonians. Even the scientist that worked on this issue can not give predictions, because they need further researches to be able to do that. I repeat, this survey is not enought to claim exacly where the Mediterranean genes in nowdays Macedonians come from. It is only sure that, whoever they were, they mixed with the nowdays Macedonians between 2000BC and Crist. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 01:18, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::And again, '''read the survey well please''', not just 1/10 of it. The survey does not make any connection with East Mediterranean, only to Mediterranean. If we are talking about people, they include old Mediterranean who lived in Spain, Italy, Senegal (little percent) and others. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]]
:Sterbinski, the survey has been rejected by the experts for good reason, because it was not science. Again, I don't know why you are still talking about it (actually, I do know why, but no need to point out the obvious). [[User:Decius|Decius]] 01:29, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::We don't have to continue talking about this research. I am not trying to keep talking about it, I am just replying to your posts when you try to deny it. As soon as you stop denying it, I won't keep talking about it.
:::And, erasing this part of the discusion is not fair. That is hidding facts from the other readers and we both know that is not OK. If you have something to say, post it here, but don't erase the parts that you personaly don't like. Othervise, I will have to complain about that to the other, neutral administrators. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:10, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:On the other hand, if we want to rewind history to 1930's [[Nazi]] eugenics, then by all means let's present the report as un-politically motivated objective science within the article. I'm sure this wonderful new policy will be popular among Jews, African-Americans, Asians, the Irish, and various other groups. ---[[User:Decius|Lord Marshal]] 02:18, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
Well for what it matters, this is what the world actually thought on the Slavo-Macedonian genetics "research" [http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v415/n6868/full/415115b_fs.html]. This is really for the people who were naive enough to not notice how ludicrous this article is by definition. What I still don't see is how would it be insulting for Greeks to have an ancient Egyptian ancestry. Anyway, since Mister whatever-owski likes genetics, I'm allowing him to have a look at a real one [http://hgm2002.hgu.mrc.ac.uk/Abstracts/Publish/WorkshopPosters/WorkshopPoster11/hgm0533.htm]. Sleep tight... :) [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 03:28, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
:::For everyone who read the research I posted it is more than obvious that you are '''not talking about the same research'''. The research I posted '''does not mention anything''' about the genetic connection of the Jews and Palestinian.
:::And it is normal some scientist to react at research proving a connection about the Jews and Palestinian. But, that denial does not include any scientifical evidence. Only a denial by 3 other scientists. And, as you can read, the magazine withdraw the research because of "'''political reasons'''" as it is said on the web page. Not because of "'''scientifical reasons'''". So, there was no scientifical denial involved.
:::But, let me repeat again. The research I linked to does not say anything about the Palestinian-Jews conflict. And, your denial is exacly concerned with that issue. So, it is more than obvious that '''you linked to a completely different research'''. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:52, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:No, it is the same research. See below. ---[[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 03:07, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::It is not the same research. I got proves this time. See below. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 04:55, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Have you ever thought that the survey on Palenstinians might have been for practical reasons on a different PDF? Oh, so you haven't... You're lucky you have others to think for you. Take a look at this [http://kinoko.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~duraid/stolen_science/The_Origin_of_Palestinians_and_Their_Genetic_Relatedness_With_Other_Mediterranean_Populations.pdf].
::::I wonder what kind of pathetic excuse you'll come up with this time. [[User:Miskin|Miskin]]
:::I linked to the same research below. Anyone who sees the both researches can see are they the same, or completely different researches. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 20:14, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:So it was ''flawed'' genetic research that was ''skewed'' in a certain direction? What a surprise. [[User:Decius|Lord Marshal]] 03:42, 14 August 2005 (UTC) (I've seen this happen in wide genetic studies many times, not just this one, as I've noted)
:::Sorry to dissapoint you. It is not the same research. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:52, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::Actually a person of fundamental historical knowledge doesn't have to seek scientific judgement in order to understand that this article is another racist joke. I've had the article in PDF for a year now (willing to distribute it) and it only makes me feel sorry about how desperate some extremists can get. Half of the articles members have Slavic names (-owski, -ov, etc) and although it is somehow published from a spanish university, the actual genetic research is done in the university of [[Skopje]] (yes, it's actually that neutral). It begins with a brief historical introcution which should be a copy-paste from makedonija.org and proceeds with the procto-biology thingie. The article claims that at some undocumented point of Greek history in which the Minoan civilization was still powerful (3rd millenium BC), a huge wave of Egyptians might have crossed into Greece. Based on the assumptions that the ancient Ethiopians are cousins of the ancient Egyptians, this theory is generalised into "Modern Greeks have African genes". From what I've said the author's ignorance basically states that Modern Greek history starts during the [[Minoan]] civilization. The propaganda of the article reveals the author's beliefs are that a fictional non-white (in this case black) ancestry is something degrading to a European nation (the only thing that's missing is the word [[nigger]]). Basically none of it makes sense and it's comico-tragically stupid, so don't ask for details, I can give out the article to anyone who wants to witness 18th century-style nationalist despair existing in modern times. What also makes me feel sorry is that the editor's of a supposedly neutral encyclopedia don't have the basic knowledge that allows a scholar to smell a fraud, even when it's as obvious as this one. [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 00:03, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::::That is not truth, even funny. Firstable, '''just 3 of 10''' scientist involved are with Macedonian origin.
::::Another thing. The research is done in Spain and USA. The university in Skopje does not have enought equipment and facilities for HLA genes researches. Actually, the university here is hardly doing any researches at all.
::::So, please stop claiming senceless things and check your information before you post them here. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:52, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:No, it is the same research. See below. ---[[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 03:07, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::It is not the same research. I got proves this time. See below. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 04:55, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::So much for your 'proves' [http://kinoko.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~duraid/stolen_science/The_Origin_of_Palestinians_and_Their_Genetic_Relatedness_With_Other_Mediterranean_Populations.pdf]. [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 11:31, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::We know that the university of Skopje lacks the facilities to perform such a research, hence the fabrication of results. If the university of Skopje has nothing to do with the reasearch, then why the hell is it mentioned in the PDF? Or do you want me to quote it for you?
*''2Tissue Typing laboratory.
Institute of Blood
Transfusion, Skopje.
Republic of Macedonia
*The contribution by A.
Arnaiz-Villena and K.
Dimitroski is equal and the
order of authorship is
arbitrary''
Oh I know, that must be another conspiracy of those Sub-Saharan Greeks. I just feel sorry for the Spanish people whose names were dragged into this. :/ [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 11:31, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Miskin, everything you posted here is your assumption, nothing more. Anyone who wants to see the full text of the research, can get it here: http://www.makedonika.org/processpaid.aspcontentid=ti.2001.pdf.
:::Every single claim in the research is supported by scientifical reason, including evidence. And, it was never been '''scientificaly''' denied. Only politicaly, as Miskin is doing now.
:::One more important thing. I read this research in January or February 2005th. If someone wanted to use it in political and nationalistic claims, why they haven't done it in 4 years, since the research appeared?
:::So, every claim for Macedonian nationalistic connection with this research is absurd, because no one of us (Macedonians) wanted to include it in the Macedonia page here on Wikipedia. But, including it in the page for the nowdays Macedonians ([[Macedonian Slavs]]) should be discussed.
:::And, Dacius, how do you want me to stop talking about the research when I read stupidities like this posted by Miskin? [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:52, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
So let's have a look at the authors of the article which concerns the Palenstinians [http://kinoko.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~duraid/stolen_science/The_Origin_of_Palestinians_and_Their_Genetic_Relatedness_With_Other_Mediterranean_Populations.pdf]:
*''Antonio Arnaiz-Villena, Nagah Elaiwa, Carlos Silvera,
Ahmed Rostom, Juan Moscoso,
Eduardo Gómez-Casado, Luis Allende, Pilar Varela,
and Jorge Martínez-Laso''
Hmm, no Skopjan names this time, how strange. :/ I suppose mr Dimitroski had been very picky on the topics of his research, Har, Har, Har! :D [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 11:31, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::And for those who were too lazy to read the academic opinion:
...'''Our primary concern, however, is that the authors might be perceived to have been discriminated against for political, as opposed to legitimate scientific, reasons.
...The limitations are made evident by the authors' extraordinary observations that Greeks are very similar to Ethiopians and east Africans but very distant from other south Europeans; and that the Japanese are nearly identical to west and south Africans. It is surprising that the authors were not puzzled by these anomalous results, which contradict history, geography, anthropology and all prior population-genetic studies of these groups. Surely the ordinary process of refereeing would have saved the field from this dispute.
...We believe that the paper should have been refused for publication on the simple grounds that it lacked scientific merit.''' Having said this, I think everyone has got an idea about how seriously can editors like FlavrSavr and sterbinski be taken. This entire section should be removed from the discussio page, not simply because it's extremely rediculous and disgraceful for the encyclopedia, but also because it includes [[racism|racial discrimination]] based on the colour of people's skin. [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 00:03, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Interesting, but the publications you are talking about was withdrawn because of "political" reasons (as you can read on the same web site).
::::And let me repeat that the research that we are talking about does not concern Japanese, Jews, Palestinians etc. You are talking about a '''completely different research''', Miskin.
::::The only one that can not be taken serious is you, Miskin, because of trying to use a denial to a completely different research than the one we are taking about here. And, the denial that you linked to '''does not include''' any scientifical denial. Actually, that denial is completely the same as yours, wrote by someone that didn't like the results and '''without''' any scientifical evidence.
::::And let me repeat again... The denial is for a completely different research. Sorry to disapoint you.
::::And, if you ever again try to introduce me as nationalist using unsuported claims and links to denials of wrong researches, I will repost that to the neutral administrators, so they will be able to judge about your neutrality. They already know that you are forcing your POV by outnumbering us, but it won't work this time. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:52, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
Only for political reasons? Can you even read? The "research" has basically contradicted every single science that is known to mankind! :D And besides, this rejection is not just POV judgement passed by "Nature", it's an official document compiled by some of the world's leading universities (mentioned). It can be found in many places all over the internet, "Nature" is only one of them. You honestly make me laugh Sterbinski. Such desperation and denial is rare in the 21st century. [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 11:31, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
'''Decius''', if you want us to stop taking about this research, tell to the Greek nationalist on this page to stop making unsoported denials and nationalistic conclusions from the research. As I said, the idea behind introducing this research was not to deny anything Greek... I just wanted to introduce evidence that we (nowdays Macedonians) have very mixed origin, not just Slavic. As you can see from my posts, I '''never''' claimed that this research proves any origin we have from the Antient Macedonians. Even without the research, I am sure that we have conection with them, same as several nations on the Balkany. Also, I never claimed that Macedonia has exclusive right over the history and name of the region Macedonia. So, what is that that you call nationalistic in me? [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:52, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:I heard those greasy Greeks smell bad. Is that true? [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 11:31, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
And, again, let me repeat... I do not think that we should put several genetic researches on the Macedonia page because of a simple reason: the genetic researches (including about the HLA genes) are not advanced enought to prove or deny some historical point of view. For now we can say that only thing that these researches prove is that the modern nations are not "clear" nations and that the people from the area were mixing between themselves.
On the other hand, I think that we should include a sentence saying something like "the genetical researches proved that the modern population of the region Macedonia, is with mixed genetical structure and the origin of the modern nations in the region can not be tightly connected to any ethnicities that lived in the area in the past". This only says the same that we already agreed about: the modern nations are not directly connected with the ethnicities that lived in the past on the same teritory, including the region of Macedonia. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 03:02, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:Isterbinski, you are mistaken. The Nature report clearly mentions the name '''Antonio Arnaiz-Villena''', the same name mentioned in the Slavo-Macedonian report. The Nature report also discusses the Greek-Saharan claim, and rejects it. '''It is the same research being discussed'''. Do not be a '''nationalist''' and do not be an '''idiot''', I. Sterbinski. [[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 03:05, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::Do you really beleive that this famous scientist has only one research?
::I made an intensive search and it is clear that the research that you are talking about is concerned with the Palestinians and their origin. That is the survey that is contraversial. Here is a link to it:
::http://kinoko.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~duraid/stolen_science/The_Origin_of_Palestinians_and_Their_Genetic_Relatedness_With_Other_Mediterranean_Populations.pdf
::I found many links that explain the reason why it was contraversial, but they all claim the same: '''the survey is opposed because of political reasons'''. Only '''politics'''. Here are some links for you, so you can read by yourself:
::www.tufts.edu/~skrimsky/PDF/nature_genetics.PDF
::http://www.uscrusade.com/forum/config.pl/noframes/read/1377
::http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2003%20Opinion%20Editorials/September/19%20o/Journal%20axes%20gene%20research%20on%20Jews%20and%20Palestinians%20Robin%20McKie.htm
::http://www.survivreausida.net/a4990
::You can find many, many more using google: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%22Antonio+Arnaiz+Villena%22+palestinian
::All of them say clearly that the text was withdrawn because of '''political reasons'''.
::On the other hand, the survey I gave you is concerned with the origin of the nowdays Macedonians and Greeks. It has nothing to do with the other survey. Here is a link:
http://www.makedonika.org/processpaid.aspcontentid=ti.2001.pdf
::Both researches gave the same conclutions about the origin of the today Greeks, so that is why it is mentioned in the link Miskin posted. You can all read the both researches (you have links above) and see by your self.
::BTW, Antonio Arnaiz Villena is extremely respected and popular scientist and he was never scientifically denied. All the denials come from people who are motivated by political reasons and who don't like the results of his researches. To be honest, if his research showed that I am 100% Slavic, I wouldn't like that result. So, it is sensitive issue. As I said before, the HLA genes researches are expected to change the history, but that does not mean that people will accept that easyly. '''According to me, the paper can lie, but noone can change our blood and genes. They have more information than any historical book written before'''.
::Decius, I am little disapointed by your support to this denial, especially because of using terms as "idiot" when you are actually thge one who is mistaken. But, I won't call you "idiot". Respect to you.
:To be specific, I was warning you to not be an Idiot. You are still mistaken here, however, not me. And the title Idiot also gravitates to you because you accepted the crap on that site that compared Thracian and illyrian names to Slavic words as "proof" about Macedonian Slavs having words from the ancient Macedonians. Sorry, but I and many others have lost "respect" for Mr. '''Sterbinski''' (who is also a [[liar]]). ---[[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 05:09, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::Many other Greeks? I don't need your respect, you never gave respect to anyone that does not agree with your nationalism. Probably even the Human Rights Watch are idiots when criticising Greece for the treatments they have towards the Macedonian minority in Greece.
:::Cry as much as you want, but I gave you the proofs, so now I will take some rest.
:::And, by the way, why you keep using different names, Decius? You are afraid that someone will see that it is the same person? Or, maybe you want the people to beleive that many share your opinion?
:::BTW, If you think that there are no Macedonian words with antique Macedonian origin, you are mistaken. There are neutral authors that wrote about this issue. I sugest you to read something more than the books in the local library in back in Greece. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 05:26, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:Did I say "Greeks"? I said '''many''' others, and this means people from any nation (including [[Bulgaria]], [[United States]], [[Canada]], etc.) not just [[Greece]]. [[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 05:33, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::The only people that felt threatened by this survey were the users from Greek nationality. I just don't understand why.
:::The ones who lost respect for i_sterbinski, can talk for themselves, in private, so we can solve our issue. I don't need a respect from people like you. My work in the field of Human rights for 20 years helped many people whose Human rights were threatened or taken away. They have their complete respect for me. My co-workers have respect for me, people from several different nations (including Bulgarians, Greeks, Americans, Canadians etc.), people who work in the same area for years. Your respect does not worth more than any of theirs.
:::Probably you are just some 20 + something year old (maximum) kid who thinks that he saw the world after reading few books from the library. You still have a lot to learn. But, after this, I certainly doubt that you will ever get real respect from anyone out of your family.
::I hope that now you will see that I am not beeing nationalist. I am just trying to get the truth about my identity and stop everyone who wants to deny it.
::'''Now it is more than sure that we are not talking about the same research'''. And anyone who decides to post links, please make sure that you have the right link and that the content of that link is exacly what you need. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 04:55, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:Don't waste your time, Sterbinski. If we need to, we can email the editors of '''Nature''' itself, or the geneticists in question. In the meanwhile, try not to blatantly lie again. [[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 04:59, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::E-mail them, feel free to do it. They alone wrote on the page where the research used to be that:"Genetics paper erased from journal over '''political''' content". Here is a link:
::http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaCitation.taf?id=N1&jtl=NATURE&cd_year=2001&vid=414&ppf=382
::You can get the same by first getting on the page where Miskin linked us (the so called denial) and latter press on the link of the research at the beggining of the (do called) denial.
::And, once again. I gave you links to both researches and comments about the removal of the first research, that one that Miskin linked. So you can see alone.
::So, you can colclude by your self... '''the denial is about a different research'''. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 05:11, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:Your latest link does not show what you think it does. You are clutching at straws. [[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 05:18, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::You can get to that page through your so called denial. It says clearly: "'''because of political content'''". But, even that is not important, because simply: '''We are talking about different researches'''.[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 05:26, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:Keep telling yourself that Sterbinski. Write it on a little piece of paper and staple it to your shirtpocket. [[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 05:33, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::This kind of comments I hear everyday, from my children when they fight who owns some toy ("If it is yours, write it in a paper and stick it on your head").
:::You just proved that you do not deserve any respect. Including from your fellow Greek, my co-worker Christos, right here next to me. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 06:22, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:Well, excuse me for trying to make clear that what you are offering as a "scientific paper" has in fact been rejected by the scientific community. For a person claiming he works for "Human rights", you seem to be quite anti-Greek and anti-Bulgarian. [[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 06:32, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::Now it is obvious that you haven't check any of the links I posted here. They clearly show that you are mistaken. Anyone neutral would do that, so I don't care that you didn't. Refusing to educate yourself will only harm you. Not me.
:::I will sugest you to stop acusing me for beeing anti-Greek or anti-Bulgarian. In this moment I have both, Greek and Bulgarian person with me in the office and I am working with them for many years. They read every comment I posted here, because we work on this project together (as representors of all 3 nations concerned).
:::On the other hand, I have Greek origin too, my grandmother from my father's side is half Greek (her name was Elefteritsa). So, beeing anti-Greek would be same as beeing against myself.
:::And, by the way, the last case I was working on was about a Bulgarian person who was centenced to 7 days in jail because of having the Bulgarian flag open in his own home, in Tripoli, Lybia. By The Way, we won, so he will get a compensation from the goverment.
:::Life has no limits, kid. Only limits are in your mind. Bulgarian, Greek or Macedonian, everyone is same for me. Only thing that matters is to have an open heart and free mind... something that you (as far as I could see) really lack. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 06:49, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:Isterbinski, a '''kid''' is one who mass deletes the entire page, as you just did using an unlogged-in ISP. [[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 06:53, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::I am using the IP address 62.162.198.123. The page was vandalized by IP address 65.48.193.80. The administrators can check was I using that IP. Stop making unsuported acusations. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 06:58, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:You're right. It was probably that [[Martian]] sitting on your shoulder. [[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 07:01, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::Are you trying to be funny? Because you are not. You are just making and ass of yourself. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 07:06, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:Isterbinski, you made an ass out of your self when you first added false claims into the text (see below). ---[[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 07:10, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::Are they false or not, you are the last person who can judge them. With this last couple of posts that you added today, even my respected friend Christos lost his hope in you. From moderate Greek patriot, you sudenly turned into hidden nationalist (his words, I swear in his friendship). [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 07:16, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:I'm still moderate Isterbinski, but I don't know about you. I do not say that Wikipedia '''must''' call your people [[Macedonian Slavs]]. That is up to others to decide. On the other hand, you suddenly turned from a semi-reasonable person (on the points we were discussing at least) into someone who is in denial and insists on claiming that a rejected genetic paper is still accepted. But enough about that paper for today, that will be detailed later. I do not see an actual reasonable person like [[User:FlavrSavr]] still defending that paper in absence of proof that it is considered valid. [[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 07:25, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::If you want to deny something, first read it. I left enought proves and links here, so anyone can judge by himself.
:::Of course I will support the research, because no one here gave me a reason not to. You tried to deny it, but with false information, linking to a completely different research which is dedicated to the Palestinian origin.
:::Do you really expected me to suport Decius over a world famous scientist with his publicated and scientificaly undenied research?
:::I am sure that FlavrSavr supports the research too (the research that I linked to, not the one that you tryed to deny without any proofs), but he is obviously too busy to waste time on educating people like you. And I am sure that every neutral administrators who is interested about the issue will see how you wanted to trick the people here.
:::Look, I am slowly ending my report on this day. And because I don't see anything worthed to mention that you added today, I will spend some more time on the other cases I am working on. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 07:37, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:Pending actual verification, the report (that you support) is not scientifically accepted, plain fact. You can claim that it is, but not in a Wiki article. ---[[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 07:47, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::With you saying that it is not scientifically suported, nothing will change. The people who are interested will search for it and see by themselves is it or it is not suported. Internet is full of informations about it.
:::If you really want to know '''how popular is Mr. Arnaiz Villena''', please visit this link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&term=%22Arnaiz%2DVillena+A%22%5BAuthor%5D. It gives (more less) every research he was a part of. '''More than 200'''. This is taken from the website of the National Center for Biotechnology Information, based in USA which represents a national resource for molecular biology information in the USA.
:::Instead of wasting your time on kid responces, spend some time searching the web and reading something useful. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 08:11, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:Quite interesting. Those papers of his (which we are discussing, not whatever else he submitted) were dismissed, not just disputed, that's how ''excellent'' they were. ---[[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 08:18, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::That is just your words. Put here any link which says any of the research of this guy was denied scientifically. He has more than 200 papers which he is author of and which are accepted in USA. And, the "mastermind" Decius found a proof that his theories are fake. So, if you did, can you please share it with us?
If anyone can submit his work in the NCBI of USA, why they do not have any of your works, Decius? [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 08:57, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:You do seem to be in denial, and it is almost shocking (but not quite). Read that link from Nature again, and the names appended to it. His paper was even dropped from the Journal in which it was published (by the way, that's what that link is talking about, if you haven't noticed, not that the paper against it was dropped from ''Nature'', as you mistakenly claim). Villena's conclusions will remain in the fringe of genetics, because there is no indication that the general community of geneticists agrees with him. ---[[User:Decius|Tony Starks]] 09:01, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::Villena was a guest writter for that issue. His claims were having certain political content (concerning Jews and Palestinians, not Greeks and Macedonians), so that is why that was withdrawn. Even the newspaper clearly states that the withdraw was because of '''political''' content. All that can be found on the links that I posted up, so let the people see by themselves.
:::On the other hand, that is not important for this issue, because completely other research was withdrawn. '''It is not the same research'''.
:::Concerning Villena's researches, he has more than 200 (there is also a link about this somewhere above). Do you really beleive that your words are more powerful than his scientifical work?
::Any neutral administrator will see the truth. So, if you are right, they will see that. So, let's stop this idiotic corespondence and use our time for something else. This issue has enought text and links for anyone to be able to judge by himself. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 19:19, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::This is getting monotonous. When will someone block the troll so that we can proceed with more serious edits? [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 11:31, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::When you grow up and understand that the world might not be the same as your wishes. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 19:19, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
==General fallacies of Isterbinski's edits==
*1. The following text: ''At the end of the [[10th century]] Macedonia turned into the political and cultural centre of [[Bulgaria]] as Byzantine emperor [[Basil II]] conquered the eastern part of the country, including the capital of [[Preslav]], in [[972]]. A new capital was established at [[Ohrid]], which also became the seat of the [[Bulgarian Patriarchate]]. After several decades of almost incessant war, Bulgaria fell under Byzantine rule in [[1018]]. The whole of Macedonia was incorporated into the Byzantine Empire as the province of Bulgaria and the Bulgarian Patriarchate was reduced in rank to an archbishopric.'' is substituted with ''At the end of the [[10th century]] Macedonia turned into Slavic political and cultural centre as Byzantine emperor [[Basil II]] conquered the eastern part of [[Bulgaria]], including the capital of [[Preslav]], in [[972]]. A new regional capital was [[Ohrid]], which also became the seat of the [[Ohrid Archbishopric]]. After several decades of almost incessant war, the whole of Macedonia fell under Byzantine rule in [[1018]].'' the obvious attempt being to erase the name of Bulgaria and create the impression that there was something else than a Bulgarian state in this 10th century Macedonia. Unfortanutely for Istirbinski, everyone in the scientific world except the Macedonians themselves are convinced that there was. Links to: [http://www.bartleby.com/67/438.html The Encyclopedia of world history, 2001], [http://www.bartleby.com/67/438.html The Encyclopedia of world history, 2001],
[http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761556147_8/Bulgaria.html#s34 Encarta, History of Bulgaria],
[http://www.bartleby.com/65/ba/Basil2.html The Columbia Encyclopedia 2001 edition],
[http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article?tocId=9356697 Concise Encyclopedia Britannica],
[http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0066966.html Hutchinsons Encyclopedia],
[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03046a.htm The Catholic Encyclopedia, History of Bulgaria]
:::VMORO, have you maybe read the part of History of Macedonia in part of these links? You won't like it much. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 22:54, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
:::1) Yes, I presented that part of the history as Slavic. Macedonins beleive that Tzar Samoil's state was Macedonian, and Bulgarians beleive it is Bulgarian. Same happens with the [[Ohrid Archbishopric]], we both beleive it is ours. The difference VMORO is that I did not put that they are Macedonian, as you put that they are Bulgarian. I Put that they are Slavic. '''NPOV''', not Bulgarian POV, not Macedonian POV.
:::And, yes, many your links say that Samuil was Bulgarian. Guess what? Wikipedia was saying the same just 2 days ago. Promoting your assimilation politics led to this.
:::The Samuil kingdom was a result of a rebelion led by 4 brothers (David, Moses, Aaron and Samoil) against the Bulgarian kingdom that was getting weaker at that time. I will not make any links here, leading you to sites that are supporting my POV (like VMORO did). That way, I will just try to lead you. Just search the web by your own with google.com, you all can see how many different POVs you will find.
::::::According to all encyclopaedias and history books Samuil was a Bulgarian Tsar, Istirbinski, and I have provided enough examples of that. There is a case of Macedonian POV against NPOV. Discussion closed. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 18:44, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
:::::::It is quite confusing why there were 2 states in the same period of time that the Bulgarian see as Bulgarian. Why would there be 2 if they felt only Bulgarian?
:::::::Another thing that you forget is that the Byzantine documents use the word Slavic for a while, but not all the time. The term Bulgarian appeared in their documents when they stopped using the terms Sklavines (Slavics). Before that they never used the term Bulgarian. Only Bulgars, which is completely different thing. Another prove that Bulgarian in that time ments Slavic.
:::::::Another interesting fact is that Byzantine documents describe Samuil's kingdom as rising kingdom, which might make them more problems than the Bulgarian.
:::::::Why the other encyclopedias are describing him as Bulgarian? Because of people like you, which were doing the same thing as you are doing here in Wikipedia, writting everything they can think of, just to assimilate everything that appears to be Macedonian. On the other hand, anyone who wanted to deffend the Macedonian origin of Samoil in time of ex-Yugoslavia was inprisoned as separatist, because of promoting the national feelings of the Macedonians. Have you heared of Goli Otok?
:::::::NPOV does not mean ignoring Macedonian POV and promoting Bulgarian POV. Maybe you were doing this for years, but it is enought now.[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 22:46, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
You are beating around the bush, Istirbinski - and not saying anything to the point. Apart from the Byzantine records, we got the correspondence of Samuil with the Roman pope - affirming that he was officially crowned in 997 - '''after''' the death of Tsar Roman, the brother of the last tsar who resided in Preslav. There are also the German records of Oton and, of course, the Bitola Inscription of Ivan Vladislav where he called himself Bulgarian by birth. Either everyone in Europe suffered from mass delusions at that point - or there is something which Hugh Poulton very properly called "regressive nationalism" - the attempt to claim everything that happened in Macedonia as Macedonian Slav.
:::Good that you mentioned this VMORO. You can not (no one can) ignore that there was a period when there were 2 countries that Bulgaria claims are theirs. Why would that be that way? Is there any other example in the world when the same ethnicity (if we can talk about ethnicities in 10th century) had two kingdoms?
:::Another interesting point is why Samuil got his crown from the Roman pope afte the death of the last member of the Bulgarian royal family.
:::I hope you know how Byzantine appeared on the map and all the history of confrontation bewteen the eastern and western part of the Roman empire. Why you did not mention that when given the crown, Samuil had to promise his loyality to the Roman pope that he will fight Bysantine till its end? When the Bulgarian Preslav based kingdom ended, the Western Roman empire lost their influence over the region. So, they needed Samuil for that. It was a fair deal.
:::In the same time the pope had to find a official reason for this move. So, Samuil was claimed to be related with the Preslav kings, a claim that was denied by everyone, including the Bulgarians.
:::You mentioned Ivan Vladislav. Interesting. After the death of Samuil, how do you think he could get his place (over the other potential candidates) and convince the Roman pope to give him the crown?
:::And why you never mentioned the denial of that document, written by Gavril Radomir, claiming the non-Bulgarian origin of the Samuil royal family, a document which was kept in Skopje, in St. Bogorodica (St. Marie) church? You know, the same church that the Bulgarian army burned when running away from Skopje after the World War 2. A church that is getting reconstructed now, but more than 6000 documents were lost in that fire.
:::For those who don't know, Gavril Radomir was a son of Samuil, killed by the hands of Ivan Vladislav, which shows what all Ivan Vladislav could done to get the throne. Ivan Vladislav was a son of Aron, the brother of Samuil. Another interesting thing... Gavril Radomir once saved Ivan Vladislav's life. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:39, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Which exactly was the period when there were two countries which called itself Bulgaria, Istirbinski? Because the first time the "westerners" were mentioned was around 973 (if I remember exactly) when they appeared before the German emperor as representatives of the '''Bulgarian Empire''' and were admitted as such. I.e. after the fall of Preslav:-))) And a better proof than that this was a case of civil war can simply not exist. The Macedonian people rises against the dreadful Bulgars and calls its country Bulgaria, hahaha... Let's not become ridiculous, Istirbinski. And let's not quote mysterious documents that burned mysteriously in some mysterious monastery. The next thing you could say is that the Macedonians flew to the Moon but due to the dreadful Bulgars who burnt this and that document... [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 08:00, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:::That what you are talking about is just one of 3 theories of how the Samuil kingdom appeared, the one that has the least support. The theory I am talking about is the 2nd theory, which says that in 969th a part of the Bulgarian kingdom got separated, which latter was a base of the Samuil kingdom. The third theory is too complicated for explaining it here. Actually, this third theory actually is the newest and is fast getting the most support. Shortly, the third theory implies that non of us (Bulgarian or Macedonian) can not claim conection with Samuil, because in that time the nationalities were not even developed. So, my friend, we are probably both talking bullshit here, while the historians have other ideas. If you didn't know, there is even a theory of Samuil's origin from Armenia.
:::Concerning the "misterious" documents... read some history books of the Bulgarian ocupation of Macedonia in World War 2. How documents and historical subject found in Macedonia between 1920th and 1940th appeared in Bulgaria in the 1950s and 60s? Why subjects and documents kept together with the ones that latter appeared in Bulgaria were never found? Why 100s of Ortodox churches and monasteries were burned, when the Bulgarians are Ortodox too?
:::Look, Vatican has copies of some of those documents who were "lost" during the World War 2. They are still kept secret, but Vatican already gave some hope that they will make them public in the next decade. By the way, you can check these information in your national library and museum, they have to have the year of transfer and origin of the documents and other historical subject taken from Macedonia to Bulgaria. I think that those information were made public by Simeon Sakskoburggotski's goverment, but I am not sure.
:::On the other hand, the same Vatican gives the same importance and honors to both (Bulgarian and Macedonian) delegantions when celebrating the St. Cyril (Constantine) and Methodius days in Rome? Both delegations have the honors of meeting with the pope in every single year. And we both know the close ethnic connection between Ohrid Archbishopric and Samuils people (if you can talk about ethnicities in the 8-10th century).
The reasons which I enumerated are the reasons why Samuil is internationally regarded as a Bulgarian tsar and the Macedonian claims as a bunch of nationalistic claptrap. And strangely how the Byzantines never used that synonym "Bulgarians" to any other Balkan Slav - the Serbs were called Serbs, the Croats were called Croats. It's about time you, the Macedonians, called yourselves for over 10 centuries nothing else but '''Bulgarians'''. Nationalism can make up theories beyond one's wildest imagination but the facts remain facts. I recommend you stay away from the middle ages, the results which you can get there are below zero. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 07:54, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
:::Maybe we left you for more than 50 years to convince the world that everything on the region of the Balkan is Bulgarian, just because we were not allowed by the strict Yugoslav goverment and Tito. Everyone that was deffending the Macedonian history was inprisoned as separatists. But now, no one can stop us to say the truth. It is interesting that you got the biggest support from the Russians in doing that, because you were their first deffence line from Tito. But, it is even more interesting that these theories that I am talking about now are nowdays mostly supported by the Russians. Who would thought, ha?
:::And, this assimilation Bulgarian politics is happening for centuries. And, maybe you should search for more maps, maybe some books concerning the Istambul and Vatican libraries, at least the parts open to the scientists. Don't just keep your lazy ass on internet, you can not find that online. I don't know why, ask the pope and Bartolomeo why they do not allow that.
:::Even the Ecumenical Patriarchy of Istambul (whose leaders are Greek) recognizes the Macedonian origin of the The Ohrid Archbishopric (which was formed in Ohrid in the same period of time as Samuil), despite the fact that they do not recognize the Macedonian Ortodox Church. Interesting, isn't it?
:This is claptrap. The Patriarchate of Constantinople has never recognised the Ohrid Archbishopric as "Macedonian" and will never do that. And no one else will do that. The Catalogue of Ducang and the charters of Basil II explicitly state that the archbishopric was established on the basis of the reduction of the rang of the Bulgarian patriarchate. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 08:06, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:::::Maybe you didn't notice, but they already did. There is pararel Ortodox church in Macedonia (besides the Macedonian Ortodox Church) with that name, "Ohrid Archbishopric" whose conection with the old Ohrid Archbishopric is written in their canonic laws. That church has no support from the Macedonians at all, but has officially been recognized from the Serbian and Greek Ortodox Church, same as The Patriarchate of Constantinople. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 00:22, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
*2. The following text: ''the Greek army set fire to the Bulgarian quarter of the town of Kukush ([[Kilkis]]) and over 160 Bulgarian villages around Kukush and [[Serres]] driving some 50,000 refugees into Bulgaria proper. The Bulgarian army retaliated by burning the Greek quarter of [[Serres]] and by arming Muslims from the region of [[Drama]] which led to a massacre of Greek civilians.'' is replaced with: ''the Greek army set fire to the Slavic Macedonian quarter of the town of Kukush ([[Kilkis]]) and over 160 Slavic Macedonian villages around Kukush and [[Serres]] driving some 50,000 refugees into [[Vardar Macedonia]] and [[Pirin Macedonia]]. The Slavic Macedonian and Bulgarian armies retaliated by burning the Greek quarter of [[Serres]] and by arming Muslims from the region of [[Drama]] which led to a massacre of Greek civilians.''
What Slavic Macedonian army in the Balkan Wars are you talking about Istirbinski, are you out of your senses? And what immigration to Vardar Macedonia occupied by the Serbs when the Bulgarians from Vardar Macedonia were themselves fleeing to Bulgaria? And something more, a great deal of these 50,000 refugees did not settle in Pirin Macedonia but in Sofia (over 10,000 people) and Plovdiv. Link to the report of the Carnegie Commission of 1914: [[http://vmro.150m.com/en/carnegie/chapter2_3.html]].
:::2) Simple explanation. I am talking about the Slavs from the region, not Macedonians (or Macedonian Slavs, the term Wikipedia uses). Macedonian POV claims that those refugees were Macedonians, Bulgaria claims they were Bulgarian. In both cases they are Slavic, living in the teritory of the region Macedonia.
::: After this, the people living in the area supported the Bulgarian army and many of the joined it (because Greeks burned their vilages). I definitly agree that this part is not well explained and it should be worked on. But do not forget the '''NPOV'''.[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 22:20, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
::::The Carnegie commission report (a book which for obvious reasons is abhorred in Skopje along with many others) clearly defines what they were - Bulgarians. Practically the whole population of Kukush settled en masse in Sofia after the war, among them my grandparents. These people have always declared themselves as Bulgarians (one of them is Alexander Stanishev, who is again abhorred in Skopje), again a case of an evidence-supported NPOV against Macedonian POV. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 18:44, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
:::::You know exacly why is Alexander Stanishev hated in Macedonia. And I do not think that it is good for you to present that issue here.
:::::And as I can see, maybe you are another assimilated Macedonian, because you have origin from Kukush. :)) Just kidding, don't worry. I don't question your nationality. But your situation is another prove that this is much more complicated than you think. As a matter of fact, I have family which runned away from Kukush, but 30 years later. Now, they live in USA and they are bigger Macedonian nationalists than anyone I know. One of them even has a help-fond for supporting the separatistic Macedonian party in Bulgaria which fights for getting back Pirin Macedonia into Macedonia. As I said, too complicated issue.
:::::Again the same thing. I can find you 10000 documents describing the Macedonians, Serbs, Croatians etc. as Yugoslav. Because, that is how they were identified at that time. Same happens to the term Bulgarian before the 1930s.
:::::One more thing. You can find 1000 maps saying that the Macedonian teritory was populated with Bulgarians, another 1000 saying that it was populated with Macedonians, and even several saying it was populated with Serbs, Bulgarians... even Ermenians. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 22:46, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Again beating around the bush. No, you cannot find 100 maps that do this and that - I suggest you read Wilkinson's "Review of the ethnographic cartography of Macedonia" and then you can see that with the exception of one map by Amadore-Virgili, which represented the religious distribution of Macedonia (Patriarchate, Exarchate, Muslims), all other maps by non-Serbian or Greek authors portrayed Macedonia as predominantly Bulgarian until WWI.
::::You wish this was truth. But it is not.
::::'''If you know anything from the field of History, you would know that the modern nations are not formed before the 15th century. So, in all that period in the 10th century, Bulgarian can not (in any circumstances) be used for describing someones nationality. And, don't forget that the Byzantines started using this term in the same time when they stoped using the term "Sklavines", which means Slavs. Please read any book concerning this issue. Try to find something from neutral authors. Maybe finally you will understand what NPOV is.'''
::::Here is a list of several books, documents and maps that show your lies. Please find any of them and read/see:
----
::::-The writtings of the 15th century travel-writer Betradon de la Broquier: "And there are many Christians who perforce serve the Turk, such as Greeks, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Albanians . . . Serbians . . .".And Angiolelo, whom I have already mentioned, says of Mt. Athos that: " . . .here are to be found many monasteries of Christian monks, of whom some are Greeks, others Macedonians . . ."
::::-D. Angelov, Prinos k'm narodnosnite i pozemelni otnosheniya v Makedoniya (Epirski Despotat) prez prvata chetvrt na XIII v., Izvestiya na Kamarata na narodna kultura, seriya Humanitarni nauki, II, 3, Sofia, 1947, 11-12 ff. Just to remind you that the author is Bulgarian, but not a nationalist as you are VMORO.
::::-F. Papazoglu, Makedonski gradovi u rimsko doba, Skopje, 1957, 4; A. Shofman, Istoriya Antichnoi Makedonii, I, Kazan, 1960, 1960, 177, ff.; ibidem, Ocherki po istorii Makedonii i makedonskogo naroda, I, Kazan, 1960, 32 ff. The author is Greek, but he says that
::::-"Sketch of the Territory of Macedonia" (rezsm-i memleket- Makedonya) published on page 277 of the well known work of the equally well known Turkish historian, geographer and travel-writer of the mid 17th century, Hadzi Kalfa Mustafa or Katib Celebija (Katib Celebi, Cuhannuma, 277)
::::Also, please try to get any book which has maps held in Istambul's or Vatican's libraries. The biggest part of this contents are protected, but there are several that can be found in some Russian books.
----
Yes, and let's not slap around personal stories - which can be true, but which can also be easily made up. My grandparents also come from Kukush (and they and their forefathers have always regarded themselves as Bulgarians, but I don't slap it in your face all the time - I use sources. And again a "Slav Macedonian army" and "refugees into Vardar Macedonia" are figments of your imagination. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 07:54, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
:::I already explained that VMORO. Don't play dumb. "Slav Macedonian army" is bad construction of the sentence. All I ment was that after that, many Macedonians (including Bulgarians) from the area of Kukush joined the Bulgarian army, so they were a part of it.
:::When concerning Kukush, please see the map bellow and see where Kukush is.
:::By the way, it was confirmed by my family members (the ones runned away from Kukush) that some of the people they knew from Kukush were Bulgarians, even in 1960s, when they runned away from there, same as the Macedonians. Ask your family too, if they are realistic at all, they will tell you the truth. Maybe we even were neighboors, who knows. :)
:::VMORO, I am not here to deny your or anyone elses nationality and history. But, you are doing that to me and to all the other Macedonians.
:::And, I am not inventing any personal stories. I have quite large family, including part that stayed in Greece. I even have a little of Greek origin (my gran-grandmother Elefterica was completely Greek). I have origin from Kukush and Lerin (Greece), Zaporozje (Ukraina), Bitola, Stip and Skopje. I have family in USA, Canada, Australia, Ukraina, Greece, Serbia and UK. Quite big family.
:::Luckily, my family is full of patriots who fighted for Macedonia against assimilators like you are. I have 4 national heroes in my family, another 3 that were inprisoned in ex-Yugoslavia because of their scientific work for defending the Macedonian history again from assimilators like you are. I am proud of them and your senceless words can not take that away from me. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:39, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for the "touching history of your family", Istirbinski but I am not concerned with it. I have IMARO members in my family both from my mother's side (1/4 from Bitola) and from my father's side (Kukush) and they have always fought for Macedonia and they have always called themselves Bulgarians. The simple difference is that my family has not been brainswashed for 60 years with made up stories about "anti4ka Makedoniya" and the Macedonian people whose history stretches to eternity.
::::I already mentioned that Macedonians were under great presure for 60 years to leave the Macedonian history behind. It was completely the other way around, VMORO, we were inprisoned even because of having Goce Delchev's picture on the wall. So, Tito was trying to weeken the Macedonian identity, not to streghten it.
::::And, if all that "60 years brainwashing" shit is truth, how would you explain the Macedonian that live in USA, Canada and Australia, that runned away from Greece and Bulgaria directly in those counties and never have been in Yugoslavia? Did maybe John F. Kennedy wash their brains? If your theory is truth, how did they still feel Macedonians, decades latter?
::::And, why Bulgaria did not let Macedonians to register their political party till 2 years ago, when the European Court ordered Bulgaria to allow that? Don't tell me that you don't know what all was happening to those poor people there because of trying to keep their Macedonian identity.
::::VMORO, don't start the issue of brainwashing, because you know well how Ivan Mihajlov, Todor Zhivkov and the other clowns treated the Macedonians. Did you maybe read the book from Zelju Zelev?
::::If Yugoslavia was brainwashing us, they would force us to be Serbians, same as the Macedonians in Bulgaria were forced to be Bulgarians if they wanted to keep their houses and lands. And, same as the Macedonians in Greece were forced to become Greeks or leave their homes.
There is no Macedonian Slav army, those who joined the Bulgarian army fought as Bulgarians against the Turks and later against the Greeks and Serbs. The whole population of Kukush fled and settled in Sofia during the Balkan wars, the majority of the peasant population also moved after the Balkan Wars to Bulgaria - mostly to the Black sea coast and to the valley of the Maritsa. Do you have any idea that all the seaside villages on the coast from Burgas to Varna are settled with refugees from Aegean Macedonia? No, you evidently do not - but this is very well documented. The 7,000 people who left Kukush and settled in Bulgaria have always declared themselves as Bulgarians - hence the Bulgarian population. Don't entertain me more with stories about your family and how I was a traitor. Or should I start calling you a titoist clown?:-))) [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 08:20, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:::I never said you were traitor. You feel Bulgarian and that is all what matters. Same as I feel Macedonian.
:::Kukush is good example, because both Macedonians and Bulgarians lived there. Just, the Bulgarians left it after the Balkan wars, and Macedonians stayed there till the 1950s and 60s. Acording to them, even in the 1960s there were still little Bulgarians left in Kukush, but they all left not latter than 60s and now mostly Greeks live there.
:::Again I will tell you not to mess with my family and origin. You might give me links to 1000 pro-Bulgarian pages, but you can not take my 94 year old grandfather. He is a patriot, but he never was nationalist, so I trust him 1000%. I hope god will give him health, because he is not in good health lately. So, do not mess with it, OK?
:::Just to tell you that with all the assimilation you made over the Macedonian people, I won't be suprised that those 7000 refugees you mentioned are asimilated Macedonians. I don't claim this, I just give it as posibility.
:::Just, have on mind that no matter what we say here, non of us (me or you) will change his feelings of belonding to some nation. Personally, this discution we are having is senceless to me, because nothing will change in my or your mind. And, more or less we both have right to all the topics we are discussing. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:45, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
*3. The note that "Bulgarian was the synonym of Slavic until the 1930s". Curiously how the Serbs of Kosovo did not use that "synonym" and nor did anyone else except the people in the present-day RoM and Bulgaria. Anyway, this is an idea propagated only by the Macedonian Slavs and this should be rephrased in the proper way: According to the Macedonian Slavs.... tra-la-la, tra-la-la.
:::3)The Serbs are quite big nation, which set their own state much before us. Not to mention the Russion support they had.
:::On the other hand, Bulgaria and Greece were the main assimilators of Macedonia at the time. Greek assimilation politics was much harsher, so the people needed to identify with something non-Greek, something Slavic (what actually we mostly are, but not completely).
:::Same was in the time of the Yugoslavia. We (Macedonians, Serbs, Croats etc.) all were Yugoslavs, but non of us ever lost our ethnicity and nationality. If Gotse Delchev was Bulgarian, why would he give his life for independent or authonomous '''Macedonia'''? Isn't it natural a Bulgarian to fight for Bulgaria?
:::And at the end. The theory of "Bulgarian was the synonym of Slavic until the 1930s" is supported all around the world, not just in Macedonia. Just, in order to keep NPOV, it is maybe better to write: "Bulgarian is sometimes claimed to be a synonym of Slavic until the 1930s".
::::Evidence, my dear, evidence is the key word. No encyclopaedia or a Western history book has ever claimed Bulgarian to be a synonym of Slavic, most of them actually start talking about Macedonians first thing in the 20th century. The line you are talking about has recently started pushed by the Macedonians with no evident success. You can certainly include that statement in the article but qualified in a proper way: The Macedonian Slavs claim that... and so on. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 18:44, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
:::::::Not exacly as synomim. But many Macedonians were using it, same as they were using the term Yugoslav. Especially because you always presented yourself as our friends. But '''always''' your friendship ended with sticking a knife (literaly) in our backs. Same as the fact you were the first who recognized our independence, and now you are trying to deny our existance.
:::::::'''Luckily, we learn our lesson and we know that the devil can be better friend than you can.'''
:::::::When it is about the encyclopedias... Many encyclopedias use the term Yugoslav without identifying that it actually was covering more than 8 nations living in ex-Yugoslavia. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 22:46, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
''':. Stjepan Verkovic, a Serbianized Croat and a former Franciscan friar who adopted Orthodoxy and entered the Serbian service in Ottoman Macedonia, entitled his collection of Macedonian folk songs (1860) The Folk Songs of Macedonian Bulgars, and noted in the introduction that the title was chosen because "should somebody today ask a Macedonian Slav, 'What are you?' he would immediately get the answer, 'I am a Bulgar and my language is Bulgarian.' "''' This is from [http://kroraina.com/knigi/en/ib/i_banac.html Ivo Banac], who is regarded as one of the greatest authorities on the minority problems of Yugoslavia. Again, no real answer - just Balkan drama:-))). Let's be serious, Istirbinski, and not waste each other's time. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 07:54, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
::::Stjepan Verkovic, the same person who was constantly charged by the Serbs to have anti-Serbian ideas, supporting the rise of the Croats? Of course he would say this, because it was not in his (and Croat) interest Serbia to take a part of Macedonia.
::::By the way, the same material from your link can be found on http://knigite.abv.bg/en/ib/i_banac.html, which is a pro-Bulgarian web site. And, these 2 links are half of the 4 links on the whole internet that mention Stjepan Verkovic. The other 2 are forums. Nice going VMORO, can you give us something more relevant?[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:39, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
*4. The rest of the edits are purely cosmetic (phrasing) and can easily be worked out. The things which I have pointed out should, however, be immediately reverted when the article is deblocked unless some serious evidence is being presented (and which, I know, is absent). [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 08:44, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
:::You would like that because it completely supports the Bulgarian POV. The thing is that I never ignored your POV. Ever. I never claimed something to be Macedonian, as you claim that is Bulgarian.
:::The difference between me and you is that I respect you, and you don't. All I want is Wikipedia which will not have assimilation parts towards the Macedonians. But, your Bulgarian POV is of same importance for me as my Macedonian POV and same as the Greek POV.
:::The problem is that in Wikipedia the Macedonian POV is or ignored or just mentioned in the last line of the text. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 22:46, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
:::It is more than obvious that VMORO is defending the Bulgarian POV on Wikipedia, the same POV that we (Macedonians) feel as a assimilation over us. What about the NPOV, VMORO?
:::I was just wondering... when will you stop using Wikipedia as your tool for your nationalistic assimilation of my people?[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 16:39, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Let's talk business, Isterbinski, and not just throw around claptrap, densely covered with semi-hysterical shrieks about assimilation and lack of respect. There is a vast chasm between Macedonian historical narrative and the way history around the world views the history of the '''region of Macedonia'''. And it is not because someone is trying to assimilate you or lacks any respect for you - it is just extremely hard for a scholar to start describing, for example, Samuil as a Macedonian tsar, when all the contemporary sources (Byzantine, German, the Vatican, as well as the Bulgarian ones) describe him as a Bulgarian one (The name of Basil the Bulgar-Slayer is enough as a first-hand proof). I can quote international and respected sources with regard my edits, whereas you cannot and that's why you have resort to hystery and genocide charges. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 18:44, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
::Basil the Bulgar-Slayer... someone of the scolars should have explained you the difference between Bulgar and Bulgarian.
::::There was no difference between Bulgar and Bulgarian until the mid-20th century, it was actually Bulgar which was mostly used in English. Now, for the sake of convenience, Bulgar is used for the old Bulgars (until the 8th cent.) and Bulgarians for the fusion of Bulgars and Slavs after that. The Bulgar-Slayer is just a preserved older form, although it is inexact. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 07:54, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
::::::That only proves how '''inacurate''' the old historians can be. And, as I read today, "the Bulgar-Slayer" nickname of Basil was first time mentioned many years before the Belasitsa battle. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 03:09, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::Too bad that this is just business for you. Why wouldn't it be? You don't lose anything, you can only win.
::Why instead we don't talk about the Bulgarian power, conections and support they had around the world? Winners make the history. And we were certainly not winners in all this. We ended up with half of our history beeing claimed as someone elses.
::Explain me all the killings did by the right Bulgarian wing of IMRO towards the Macedonians fighting for independence (including 3 brothers of my grandfather, as I mentioned before), all the killings they did during the Balkan wars to anyone who didn't wanted to fight for their goals, killings that Vancho Mihailov did, the destroyed and burned churches, national houses and murdered people during the World War 2, when you occupied Macedonia etc. And explain me why the Macedonians in Bulgaria were not allowed to register a political party until 2 years ago? And why they are still not allowed to take a part in the elections? Then I will stop mentioning assimilation and genocide. And by ignoring everything that is Macedonian, you are doing the same, just in a modern way.
No Bulgarian political party has ever been allowed to register for elections in RoM, '''kid'''. Or should I remind you the smoke bombs at the Radko conference? Or the thousands of people who died in Idrizovo in the 1940s and 50s because they did not want to stop calling themselves Bulgarians, '''kid'''?
::'''This issue is too complicated for a nationalistic mind as yours, kid. I never said that anything of your POV should be erased. Put it on Wikipedia as a version that the Bulgarians support. That is the right thing to do. But do not ignore anyone elses POV. Not mine, not Greek, not Turkish or anyone elses. [[Respect]], kid!!!
::'''And explain please to this people here how can 2,5 million people, with a very weak economy and just 10% of the people who have access on internet have more web sites supporting our (the truth) POV, than you, more than 20 million Bulgarians with more than 40% people with access to internet?'''
::'''People, just search the web with any search engine you want. Read the both versiones, read the facts. Learn the truth by yourself, not by me or VMORO.''' [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 22:46, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
::Your attempts to be condescending are ludicrous. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 07:54, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
:::Maybe, but only or a nationalistic mind as yours. Do you maybe expect the people to beleive the famous historian VMORO, or I_sterbinski? Or the pro-Bulgarian and pro-Macedonian links and ideas that we both are posting here? They have their own minds, thanks god they have internet, so they can search and read by themselves.[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 03:04, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
VMORO, I beleive that finally you understand why Wikipedia should take care to present all the sides of the story (not just mine or yours). Enought with the lies which are and which are not supported by the world historians. As a matter of fact, the most respected modern historian concerning the region Macedonia is with Macedonian father and Bulgarian mother, living in USA. He completely supports the Macedonian POV. As a matter of fact, he lives completely isolated now, trying to work without any presure by Macedonians, Greeks or Bulgarians. But, including him in these conversations will have very bad influence over the NPOV of Wikipedia, so I will stop now.
We (Bulgarians, Macedonians and Greeks) will never deal what Wikipedia should say. Just give the history in chronological order and say that there are several versions of every "sensitive" issue. After giving the version, it can say: "This version is supported by the Bulgarians/Macedonians/Greeks etc.". But, again, with no support to any of them. We can all take a part in the editings, but in order to protect from nationalism, anyone who ignores someone elses POV should be baned from editing Macedonia's page.
'''Just read the [[Goce Delchev]]'s page. That is real NPOV. Why not to solve all the issues we have in a similar way?'''
::I am one of the three people who has written it, my little '''kid''', Istirbinski. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 07:54, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
::::Yes, but your version included a part saying that he was Bulgarian at the same beggining of the page. That is the main characteristic of every page that you ever touched in your hands. Can please anyone of the other neutral administrators put his oppinion about the VMORO writting here, please?
Well, we seem to be waiting for opinions but may be in vain, Istirbinski? Why don't you start writing to them and asking them questions about me? You seem to be spending all of your time on the net anyway, so you might as well do something useful. About GD - nope, not at all. Or can't you read, Istirbinski? [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 08:25, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:::: Latter, when the Macedonians got involved started saying the truth, you were forced to erase that and leave the part talking about his ethnicity. So, now it is NPOV, but this is not your version. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:39, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
One more thing. I hope that you are aware that many of the things in history can not be confirmed 100%, and we should all always have that on mind. Maybe me, or you or anyone else here is unconceously "lied", without even knowing.
[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 22:20, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
:You are so full of crap. [[User:Smartech|Smartech]] 21:25, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Another Bulgarian close-minded nationalist. Welcome, my friend.
::::Read the text well. I never said that any of your Bulgarian claims should be ignored. They are assimilative and offensive towards the Macedonian people, but they are still your POV and they should be acnowledged. But I won't let you, VMORO, or anyone else to deny all my nation, culture and history. Maybe it worked for you while we were under the strict rule of the comunism and not alowed to deffend ourselves, but not now. That time is over, together with the fall of the comunism. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:39, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
==The modern proposal of Istirbinski==
A quick look at the other major encyclopaedias shows that no precedent of such an approach exists. Below this article, there is a long list of Greek and Macedonian Slav nationalist websites which give their own versions of the history of Macedonia, whoever is interested in the different versions can easily dig into them and read for hours. Therefore, the proposition of Istirbinski is contraproductive and useless. The only reason why he puts it forward is because the Macedonian version of the history of the region suffers from tremendous lack of documental evidence and is kept together by white threads and a solid portion of imagination. Articles in this encyclopaedia should keep to fact, evidence and sources and not turn into a free flight of the imagination. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 08:44, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
:::That is the problem VMORO. Wikipedia claims its NPOV all the time. And the Macedonian POV is mentioned '''only''' at the bottom of the page. What kind of NPOV is that?
:::Why is my proposal useless? Because it will stop you from spreading your Bulgarian POV, which is just a part of the real NPOV? Because it will stop you from ignoring 2,5 million people, their history and culture?
:::Our POV does not lack documents and sources. The problem is that many of them were destroyed when you (Bulgarians), supported by Hitler occupied Macedonia. They used whole 4 years for destroying. Why you burned more than 150 Ortodox churches around Macedonia, when you are Ortodox too? Why Ohrid now has just about half of the 365 churches it had at the beggining of this century? (For those who don't know, the Macedonian Ortodox Church was the biggest protector of our identity and the one who kept all the historical documents until 1950s)
:::Luckily, the Turkish archives are quite big and anyone who ever read just a part of them knows the truth.
:::I won't be suprised if you were the actual writter of the text of Macedonia, the version that completely ignores us as a nation and presents us as artificial ethnicity made by Tito. But you will never take away my feelings and what is in my head.
:::You can daydream as much as you want. I have a grandfather older than many of the events listed in Wikipedia. He dedicated half of his life for the Macedonian freedom. 3 of his brothers were killed by the Bulgarians because they were a part of IMRO and because they were fighting for the freedom of the Macedonians.
:::No one like you can take that away from us, no matter which metod you use: killing, occupying or assimilation, like you do on Wikipedia.
:::[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 22:21, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
You are extremely pathetic. The Bulgarians are the guilty ones for all the misery which has come over the Macedonians. And the only reason why you lack any documents is because we burnt them all - bollocks. Neither have we burnt 150 churches! The article will be written according to the established scholarly opinion and evidence. Fringe opinions may follow or may not - this is not what concerns me. What you though have to learn, Istirbinski, is to lead a civilised discourse - quoting sources and arguing viewpoints - NOT whining all the time how the Bulgarians burnt everything and how your family (all of them heroes) did this and that. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 08:33, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:::You need to learn little more about your (Bulgarian) newest history VMORO. It is obvious that you can not accept the truth. I am here, I am Macedonian, get used to it. And history has records of what happened in World War 2. Why did the whole Macedonian population organized against the Bulgarian ocupator? Do you think you were only sitting and eating burek for whole 4 years?
:::And all documents are '''not''' lost and burned. Don't forget, it is just 14 years since we got out of Yugoslavia. You presented your history and evidence to the world for more than 1 century. We are just starting and for now we are getting quite good support. Recognized historians will decide what is truth and what is not after they see our side of the story and after the Vatican and Turkey open their archives for explorations.
:::No matter of anything, one fact can not be changed. We are here and our nationality is Macedonians since we know about ourselves (not Antique Macedonians, especially because that was not a nation). Get used to it, or cry as much as you want. That will stay unchanged.
:::Concerning the Macedonia page, we have 2 choises:
:::1) To include all the versions (no matter if pro-Greek, pro-Bulgarian or pro-Macedonian), without forcing any of them
:::2) To improvise and to block the page and then have this endless discutions every 10-15 days, till option 1) is accepted.
:::It is generarly accepted by the Ortodox churches that the Ohrid Archbishopric is originally Macedonian, which is confirmed by offering us that name for our church. Should I start denying the pro-Bulgarian position that that church was Bulgarian?
:::I don't agree with your version, but I respect your position. Isn't it better both versiones to be presented?[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 03:01, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
Go and dig in Istanbul, the Vatican and wherever you want. When you find something worthy of consideration, come and talk about it. Until then, don't occupy us with wish-wash talk. The Wikipedia has a clear policy that POV opinions should be included when there is a discussion/debate about something and I have nothing against that - but they are included as fringe opinions. Go and check out the [[Mars]] article, it explicitly mentions a scholar who thinks that Mars is populated by an extraterrestrial race and it also explicitly mentions what reviews and opinions his theory has among the rest of the scholarly world. The Macedonian POV - which is not supported by documental evidence - can certainly be added, but only as the extraterrestrial race living on Mars. This is the real Wikipedia, this is the real NPOV, the rest is just raving in your sleep. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]13:43, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
::That is the problem, because it is real Wikipedia and anyone can edit it, including nationalistic minds as your. And you can deny as much as you want, try to assimilate us till the end of the world. But '''I am here, I am Macedonian and nothing can change that'''.
::And don't tell me that Bulgaria has more right over Samuil (or any other historian person you tried to present as yours) and his people, because they were based in Ohrid, which is in Republic of Macedonia. So, the only way you can prove that you are more connected to Samuil than I am is if you find me a prove that whole population of Ohrid decided one day to move in Bulgaria and left Ohrid empty, without any population. Or if you take Samuils DNA sample and find a strong conection between his DNA and DNA of some Bulgarian.
::Until then, you can preach as much as you want. No matter when the Macedonian nation formed as separate nation (before Crist, Midle Ages, 18th, 19th or 20th century), it was not a decision taken by someone. It was a feeling that grew in us, something that noone can deny. Macedonian nation is reality today and only a fool can deny that. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 03:20, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::Concerning the Vatican libraries... if you didn't know, they are closed for everyone outside the Vatican leaders. Only the popes and high members of the Masones are alowed to get in there. +
::Same happens to the Turkish documents from the Ottoman period, biggest parts of them are still not made public. +
::When the Russian documents are concerned, the publications of them are strictly controled by the cominist party till the breakup of the Soviet Union, until when Russia was close allies with Bulgaria, in the "fight" against Tito and his Yugoslavia. Until now, those "protected" documents are still not made public, but it is confirmed by Boris Yelcin that they exist. He did not confirm what is written in them, but I am sure we will see that in the following decade. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 03:26, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
==Roman Imperial Provinces, 120 AD==
This is not CORRECT! [[Achaea]] ?
See [http://intranet.dalton.org/groups/Rome/RMap.html Map of the Roman Empire]
[[User:Vergina|Vergina]] 07:33, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
== NPOVism ==
Hello, I'm not planning to engage further in this debate until the participants of this discussion start referring to the name of the ethnic group - that is, Macedonians.
Decius, you are speaking as if Macedonians decided to call themselves that way just for egoistic needs, (despite knowing that they would cause them troubles), and as if that happened through a period of one day. And isn't the region when they have lived a natural choice for their name? They have been officially declaring themselves as such for at least 60 years, and nobody give a damn about that, until RoM got its independence. '''The name "Macedonians" was never seriously questioned''', and in ''real life'', nearly everybody ('''every major media outlet, encylopedia, international institution and government'''), refers to them as "Macedonians". Perhaps, you should address your concerns to the United Nations, they don't think that Macedonians are calling themselves like that because of vanity.
As for the poll, you are an intelligent person, I guess you have already concluded that it went to some explicit ethnic lines, and that it cannot be a serious decisive moment. If I had made contact with the Turkish Wikipedia, the result would definitely be more favorable for the "Macedonians" option. But that simply isn't what Wikipedia is all about.
VMORO, the progress we have made on the [[Goce Delchev]] article is an excellent example of a NPOV. I respect your constant references to encyclopedias, but I really don't know why you are still referring to Macedonians as Macedonian Slavs, given the fact that all encyclopedias refer to them as "Macedonians" (except MSN Encarta). Therefore, I cannot understand why a compromise solution such as Macedonians (nationality) is a problem to you.
We might have a part, or even an ''entire article'' dealing with this naming controversy, where arguments that Macedonians are these '''dumb, vain and ignorant Gypsies''' who are trying to steal everybody's history could be opposed to other arguments. Meanwhile, Wikipedia must stick to the most ''common, consensually and internationally accepted name for the nationality in question'', and, what is more important, to its [[NPOV]] policy. IMHO, Macedonians (nationality), Macedonians (nation), Macedonians (people) are the best solutions.
[[Image:Bigmkd2.jpg|thumb|right|300px|]]
In addition, I give you this map of these dumb Germans, who are referring to Macedonians as Mazedonier even in 1912! I mean, how could they - ''Tito didn't create the Slav Macedonian "nation"'' until 1945!
Au revoir, I have some studying to do. No it's not "How to destroy Greece in 1000 ways", it's an economic book. Peace to you all. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 17:18, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
:::What you fail to mention is that German makes an essential distinction between (ancient and Greek) ''Ma'''''k'''''edonien'' and (modern Slavic) ''Ma'''''z'''''edonien''', yet you reject any such distinction in English.--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 06:30, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
:::::So not truth. The intensive use of the "Macedonia" terms in Greece started in the 1960s and 1970s, after the most of the modern Macedonians and some Bulgarians runned away from Greece. Then you built that big monument of Alexandar the Great and started calling the streets with that name and names of other Antique Macedonian kings. Then the first Greek Macedonian appeared. And, even today, no one would identify his nationality as Greek Macedonian.
:::::Not to forget that the Germans are one of our biggest supporters for our fight for our history and rights. Do you forget that Germany's parlament already voted and recomended to their goverment to recognize Macedonia under that name, Macedonia? Same as US did couple of months ago.
:::::Look, maybe in that time the modern Macedonians were dominant in Aegean Macedonia, but now all that is '''completely''' changed and the Greeks are the ones that are dominant. No one can change that now, so Aegean Macedonia will stay as Greek teritory most probably forever.
:::::No one wants to deny you your ownership ove that part, but do not even try to uncover the history and all what happened in that area in the last 100 years. Your contrymen were working for whole 50 years to hide that from the world, so I don't think it is good for you to uncover it. Why every second modern Macedonian has origin from the Aegean part of (the region) Macedonia? That includes me, from Lerin (Florina) and Kukush (Kilkis). Why the modern Macedonian minority in Greece is not allowed to have registered political party and why they are not allowed to open a Macedonian (Macedonian Slav, like Wikipedia reffers to us) culture centre anywhere in Greece? Why Greece is the only country in European Union that is criticized by the Human Rights Watch and many others human rights organizations for their treatment of the minorities? [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:35, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
===Mazedonien, Makedonien===
::::Theathenae, your lack of arguments is amusing. Guess what, I don't speak German, but I asked a German friend about this "essential difference". Here's what he responded: '''"Yes, Mazedonien and Makedonien are definitely the same. the difference, if any, is just formal resp. in writing. I am 100% sure about that."'''
::::I also googled a bit, and I found out that Mazedonien/Mazedonier and Makedonien/Makedonier are used simultaneosly to refer to the Macedonian state/people. Here's a glipmse [[http://www.osteuropa-infoseite.de/mazedonien.htm]] (the most explicit, Bevölkerung: ca. 66% '''Makedonier''', 23% Albanier, außerdem Türken, Serben u.a.), [http://www.fifoost.org/mazedonien/index.php]('''Republik Mazedonien (Makedonien)'''), and if you're still not convinced, here's a brief sentence taken from [http://www.goethe.de/ins/cs/bel/pro/wolf/makedonien.htm|here] - ''"Der Name Makedonien und/oder Mazedonien ist politisch neutral/egal''". Egal = same.
::::Got more of your Spartan wisdoms, or will you finally admit that the your main argument for the "Macedonian Slavs" designation is that you don't like them? --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 16:11, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
:::::Take it up with the administrators of the German Wikipedia. They are the ones who appear to enforce the distinction rather studiously: [http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makedonien], [http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makedonien_%28griechische_Provinz%29], [http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazedonien]. You claim that ''Makedonien'' and ''Mazedonien'' are interchangeable; ''au contraire'', our German colleagues write that ''Mazedonien'' is "seltener auch in etymologischer Schreibung ''Makedonien''". ''Seltener'' doesn't sound quite ''egal'' to me.--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 06:07, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
::::::They are saying that ''Makedonien'' is used less frequently when referring to the Republic of Macedonia. Obviously they have established a consensus that makes a ''formal'' difference between the Republic and the wider region (geographically and historically). You can see that even in the same articles bearing the name Mazedonien, Makedonien is often used: "einer makedonischen Nationenbildung", "Dialekte Makedoniens", "makedonischen Nation" etc. Then again, the German Wikipedia is also subject to Greek editing pressure.
::::::Outside the world of the German Wikipedia, Makedonien and Mazedonien have basically the same meaning, and are not at all "essentially different". There is a small page specifically treating the problem here - [http://www.goethe.de/ins/cs/bel/pro/wolf/makedonien.htm], the one stating that ::::::''"Der Name Makedonien und/oder Mazedonien ist politisch neutral/egal''". As far as I can ::::::understand, the difference is between Cyrillic/Greek/Slavic pronunciation and the Latin ::::::pronunciation. There are numerous sites that are using the terms simultaneosly - [http://www.marcelhermann.de/online-konti-europa/mazedonien.htm], [http://www.aufenthaltstitel.de/staaten/mazedonien.html], [http://www.osteuropa-infoseite.de/mazedonien.htm], [http://www.fifoost.org/mazedonien/index.php], [http://mitglied.lycos.de/chsiemer/wappen/europa/mazedonien.htm], [http://www.helles-koepfchen.de/Beitrag.asp?ID=258], [http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~tmuehle/europa/europa/eur_mk.htm], [http://www.osteuropa.ch/fyrom/mk_1.htm]. Also, see the German version of Encarta [http://de.encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761555941/Ehemalige_Jugoslawische_Republik_Makedonien.html]-
::::::"''Ehemalige Jugoslawische Republik Makedonien, auch Mazedonien''". ''Essential'' difference?
::::::Perhaps you are the one who should take it to the admins of all of these sites and accuse them for ignorance. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 07:23, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
::It is interesting to know this, that FlavrSavr and VMORO both were involved in [[Goce Delchev]]'s page. This is quite encouraging, because that page is maybe the most neutral in the whole Macedonia issue. So, why we don't do the same with every other sensitive issue? Put everything claimed in one text and explain very carefully to the reader which people and why they support some claims? [[Goce Delchev]] is wonderful example.
::And I would ask if someone can explain me shortly were the solutions: Antique Macedonians, modern Macedonians and Greek Macedonians taken into account? And if yes, why were they refused?
::The search "Macedonians" can lead to a page where the reader can pick from these 3, which are pretty clear and less confusing. In my opinion, maybe even better than Macedonians (nationality), Macedonians (nation), Macedonians (people) (with all my respect to you, my friend FlavrSavr). Just wanted to know. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 03:01, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Since we are gonna add maps.... Let's add some maps... [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 08:50, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
[[Image:Macedonia Lejean.jpg|thumb|left|1861]]
[[Image:Mackenzie.jpg|thumb|right|1867]]
[[Image:Ethnographic Map of Turkey in Europe.jpg|thumb|left|ca. 1870]]
[[Image:Sax.jpg|thumb|right|1878]]
[[Image:F. W. Putzgers Historischer Schul-Atlas, 1905 Volkerkarte.jpg|thumb|left|1905]]
[[Image:Distribution of Races on the Balkans in 1923.jpg|thumb|right|1923]]
::Firstable, all this maps can only be found on pro-Bulgarian web sites, such as www.macedoniainfo.com.
::And putting maps here, with pro-Bulgarian ideas will only show how long the Bulgarians work on denial of the Macedonians.
::It is almost imposible to find the maps mostly kept in Vatican, Istambul and Moscow on internet. I hope that someone will be more interested on this issues and look for old maps on paper, of the period of the beggining of the 20th century.
::On the other hand, there were several neutral statics from the same period showing the Macedonians in the region:
::1)German Dr. K. Ostreich 1905: 1,500,000 (neutral statistics)
::2)English Andrew Rousos: 1,150,000 (neutral statistics)
::3)Austrian K. Gersin 1903: 1,182,036 (neutral statistics)
::4) Greek C. Nikolaides 1899: 454,000 (Greek statistics)
::On the other hand, the Ottoman statics were based on religion, but not nationality. In that time, there was no separate Macedonian Ortodox Church, so the Macedonian populaton was separated between the Serbian, Bulgarian and Greek Ortodox Church.
::Instead of putting assimilation maps here, I would put just 2 maps, so the people can see the assimilation politics of the Bulgarians:
::1) Ethnographic map of Macedonia from the point of view of the Serbs: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/balkan_serbs_1914.jpg
::2) Ethnographic map of Macedonia from the point of view of the Bulgarians: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/balkan_bulgarian_1914.jpg
::The both maps are from the 1914th. Both, Bulgarians and Serbs wanted to take Macedonia for themselves. Even though, the Serbs are not denying the existance of the Macedonians. The Bulgarians denies us.
::The both maps are at the web page of the University of Texas at Austin. i_sterbinski
Yes, Istirbinski, the only thing is that on the website where I am taking them from, there are around 20 more of them - all by neutral publishers - and all of them portray the Slavic population of Macedonia as Bulgarian. And this is only a fraction of the maps produced until the 1920s which have all (with minor exceptions) again depicted the Slavic population of Macedonia as Bulgarian. The ones which you are quoting use "Macedonian Slavs" (=the Slavs inhabiting Macedonia) because they don't wanna take a stand as to whether these "Macedonian Slavs" (a name which is not meant to be the name of a people or an ethnicity but just a geographical denomination) were Bulgarians or Serbs. In the same way, for example, [http://knigite.abv.bg/en/hb/index.html Brailsford], uses initially the name Macedonian Slavs and later says that they are Bulgarians ("The Slavs of Ochrida are as definitely Bulgarians as the Slavs of Pleven"). The maps you are quoting are from [http://vmro.150m.com/en/carnegie/ Carnegie Report of the International Commission To Inquire into the Causes and Conduct of the Balkan Wars]. Assimilation is a word which you don't know the meaning of '''at all'''. All the contemporary writers say that the vast majority of the Macedonian Slavs regarded themselves as ethnic Bulgarians (see [http://www.peacelink.nu/Boker/Durham/Durham.html Durham] or [[http://knigite.abv.bg/en/hb/index.html Brailsford]). And even Krastyu Misirkov says in "On the Macedonian matters" that the '''Macedonian Slavs call themselves Bulgarians'''. In his later works, however, he not only says that the '''Macedonian Slavs are Bulgarians''' but also that the '''Macedonian Slavs are better Bulgarians than the rest of the Bulgarians'''. Go and educate yourself and don't repeat Macedonian ideological propagandism which has nothing to do with real life events. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]13:32, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
::We already discussed the issue of Macedonians proclaiming as Bulgarians. I beleive in the version that they were doing this regarding Bulgarian to be same as Slavic and because they wanted to obbey the powerful Greek and Serbian assimilation politics of that time and because of the fact that the Bulgarians were pretending that they are supporthing the Macedonian. I did not read this theory, I was introduced to it by my grandfather who was born in the beggining of the 1920s (he don't know the exact year) and who was raised as a Macedonian by his parrents. And that was far before Tito.
::VMORO, you never answered... if you theory is truth, how will you explain 100.000s of Macedonians who now live in Canada, USA and Australia and who never were in Republic of Macedonia when it was a part of Tito's Yugoslavia? Those Macedonians who lived in Greece and Bulgaria until they had to move over the ocean. What about those who live in Bulgaria and Greece... how do they feel Macedonian, when they were never influenced by Tito?
::And you never explained why the Macedonians in Bulgaria were not allowed to registered a political party till 2 years ago?
::And, how they managed to keep beeing Macedonian, aldough surounded by people like you, supporting the Bulgarian assimilation? [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 03:56, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::It seems that the only ''real'' assimilation that took place on a massive scale was that which turned erstwhile Bulgarians into "Macedonians" within the last century.--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 13:46, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Read the above post that I gave to VMORO and stop playing dumb. You are alone aware that there are 1000s of nowdays Macedonians that still live in Greece and that were never influenced by Tito or anyone like him. Actually, they were constantly denied by Greece (even today) and runned away from their homes. How did they managed to keep their Macedonian identity? Did you force them to become Macedonians? Because, as far as I remember, you did exacly the oposite, but they could not just forget their Macedonian roots. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]]
:To FlavrSavr who gets angry with me when I use the word "Macedonian Slavs" - I am just quoting the authors (Misirkov also uses "Macedonian Slavs" and '''NOT''' Macedonians). These beginning-of-the 20th century Macedonian Slavs have nothing to do with the modern Macedonians in terms of ethnic affiliations. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]]13:32, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
:::Misirkov makes clear in "Za Makedonckite raboti" that we are different ethnicities. Don't play dumb.
:::And of course he was making clear that we have Slavic origin, as an answer to the Greek assimilations, in order to show that the Macedonians don't have Greek origin. Don't forget that he was living in the centre of the Greek propaganda in Macedonia. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 03:56, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
VMORO, I have asked you a simple question above, will you please answer it?
--[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 16:12, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
Where? There is so much shit on this talk page it will take me days of searching to find it. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 18:00, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:If you mean the Macedonians (people) thing - I have never objected to this, if you mean something else, so name it. [[User:VMORO|VMORO]] 18:17, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:::That is the one. OK, that means that I will go further in this discussion, but not that intensively (I haven't got the time). I hope will we work out a more NPOV approach to this article, that will include all POVs. (Note that the NPOV policy guarantees the inclusion of all views, and that the same policy is non-debatable). Regards. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 22:17, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
::Yes, of course. We must distinguish between Macedonians (people) and Macedonians (sub-Saharan savages).--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 09:11, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
:::::Theathenae, as far as I could notice, you are the only person here that uses the word "savages". I hope you will take the time to read the survey. The survey is not nationalistic at all, it is completely scientific. And, please stop making arogant semi-nationalistic comments. We all like the constructive Theathenae more.
:::::I personaly think that "nowdays Macedonians", "Antique Macedonians" and Greek Macedonians might be clearer than Macedonians (people) and Macedonians (nationality).
:::::If I am wrong, can someone please explain me? [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 00:32, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
::::::Yes, it is so "scientific" that in the opening paragraphs of a "genetics" study we read: "Herodotus wrote that ‘‘Macedonians’’ were ‘‘Dorians’’ and were never admitted to the Greek community. They did not speak Greek but another language presently unknown and of which only proper names remain..." See [[Dorian]] and [[ancient Macedonian language]] if you don't already know what is woefully wrong with this sentence. Nonetheless, it ''does'' have its light-hearted moments, like its hilarious conclusion that "the cultural, historical, and genetic identity of Macedonians is established according to our results". I wonder if the Spaniards wrote ''that'' line too! :D Poor-quality science, perhaps, but ''great'' comedy. Well done.--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 06:07, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
:::If you ask me, there is no issue between Greece and Macedonia about the antique Macedonians. We both have some origin from them, but '''non''' of us can have a right for exclusive rights over the history of the region of Macedonia.
:::And, any historian you would ask will comfirm you that the modern nations were formed after the 14th century. So, all the issue we have has no sence, especially because we (nowdays Macedonians) do not have any claims for the Greek teritory which you decided (in the 1960s and 70s) to call "Macedonia". [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 03:56, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::Theathenae, do you have ''any'' useful arguments to add to this discussion? --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 22:17, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
:"Hello, I'm not planning to engage further in this debate until the participants of this discussion start referring to the name of the ethnic group - that is, Macedonians." So why are you still here?--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 08:29, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
:::To stop your assimilation attempts. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 03:56, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
==Truth hurts...==
The Fallmerayer Thesis in the Light of Genetic Evidence
Jacob Fallmerayer stirred quite a controversy in the 19th century by proposing that the Hellenic nation had perished in the Middle Ages by admixture with Slavs and Albanians.
We are now in a position, through genetic evidence to evaluate this thesis, at least with respect to the question of Slavic settlements.
Slavs are distinguished by having a specific Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a, or HG3, or Eu19. This reaches frequencies of higher than 50% in Poles and decreases significantly in non-Slavic populations. The "Macedonians" of FYROM, the Slavic population immediately to the north of Greece have frequencies of R1a of 35%.
We must warn that R1a itself is not a Slavic marker. This means that any particular R1a sequence could, or could not be of Slavic origin. But, a population that has mixed with Slavs is likely to show this in relatively high levels of R1a.
Ornella Semino published a study in Science 290: 1155 in which the levels of R1a (which she calls Eu19 are given in various populations. Greeks have 11.8%, that is about 1/6 that of the Hungarians, who top the list at 60%. The Hungarians are not Slavs, but from the genetic standpoint they could very well be of Slavic origin, converted linguistically by the Asiatic Magyars. The Poles at 56.4% are the highest Slavic population.
We must note that ancient Slavic groups at the time of the Slavic dispersals probably had even higher levels of R1a. After all, Poles and Hungarians are themselves only partly Slavic in origin, and the result of admixture of a predominantly Slavic element with indigenous pre-Slavic ones. As a result, it is likely that at the time of their migrations, the Slavs had even higher frequencies of R1a.
R1a did not originate with the Slavs (that is why it is not a Slavic marker). Its origins in a Eastern European refugium after the Last Glacial Maximum means that it has had plenty of time to spread across the continent even to places where Slavs were never present. For example, its frequency in Syrians at a frequency of 10%, close to that of Greece, in the Saami of Scandinavia at 10%, Turks at 6.6% and in Albanians in 9.8%. It is even found in the Dutch, at a frequency of 3.7%, a population that has been largely unaffected by any Slavonic incursion. Given that Greece is closer to the area where R1a probably originated, it is very likely that R1a lineages would have been part of early population elements of the Balkans.
Thus, we know that at least a part of 11.8% of R1a in Greeks is of pre-Slavic origin. We also know that the ancient Slavs had frequencies of it in excess of 50%. It's hard to quantify the exact percentages, but I will give an educated guess, that 5% of R1a lineages in Greece are of Slavic origin, while the ancient Slavs had it in frequency of 75%. The picture is not much different if we change these numbers, but they will do for now. As a result, the Slavonic influence in Greece turns out to be about 7%, an almost exact match for the figure given by Vasiliev in his History of the Byzantine Empire based on demographic considerations.
This figure might turn out to be less, or slightly more. Better resolution using markers distinguishing R1a chromosomes might provide us with additional information. But, the conclusion seems unavoidable, that the contribution of Slavs to the Greek gene pool (if any) is very limited, certainly not enough to extinguish the noble Hellenic nation as Fallmereyer had proposed.
It seems that a certain cystic fibrosis mutation is of Slavic origin (in other words, the original population who became the Slavs came up with this gene). The intersting thing is that Serbs, Croats and Bulgarians don't carry the gene. What does this mean? It might mean that the gene is not really the Slavic gene. Or, as the authors of the report below say, southern Slavs lost the gene when they mixed with other populations. I'm not saying they're right in making that assumption. But who knows?
"Our results indicate that this mutation is particularly common in Czech, Russian, Belorussian, Austrian, German, Polish, Ukrainian, Slovenian, and Slovak patients. It is the second most common CF mutation to be identified in Central and Eastern European CF patients. By contrast, it was only sporadically detected in Western Europe and was absent in Bulgarian, Croatian, Romanian and Serbian CF patients. It was not found in diverse other populations of non-Slavic origin. The geographic distribution of the mutation is similar to the spread of Slavic populations during the first millenium."
------------------------------------------------------
Y Chromosomes
The most comprehensive study of Y-chromosomal diversity in Europe thus far is Rosser et al., [1]. The human Y chromosome is passed on from father to son. One can thus study one half of a population's ancestry (along the paternal line) by studying the Y-chromosome. Greek Y-chromosomes belong to haplogroups HG1, HG2, HG3, HG9, HG21 and HG26. None of the 35 Greek Y chromosomes are of non-Caucasoid origin.
A second Y-chromosome study including Greeks have also shown similar results. Helgason et al., [2] reports one HG16 sequence of North Eurasian provenance in a sample of 42 Greeks (at least 97.6% Caucasoid). To put this in perspective, eight HG16 chromosomes occur in 110 Swedes (at least 92.7% Caucasoid) and three HG16 sequences in 112 Norwegians (at least 97.3% Caucasoid) were also found. HG16 is shared by many populations ranging from Europe to Mongolia. Its origin has been placed by [7] in the Eastern range of its current geographical distribution.
A third Y-chromosome study, by Malaspina et al., [3] which included a sample of 28 continental and 83 Cretan Greeks (total sample size of 111) found no evidence of the presence of non-Caucasoid Y chromosomes in Greeks.
A fourth Y-chromosome study, by Semino et al., [4] included 76 Greeks and 20 Macedonian Greeks. One Eu6 lineage, corresponding to HG10/HG36 [5] is probably of East Asian origin. One Eu17 lineage corresponds to HG 28 which is frequent in Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent [6]. In total, admixture of 2.1% is detected (if we label HG 28 as non-Caucasoid).
A fifth Y-chromosome study, by Weale et al., [8] included 132 Greek students from Athens. The same haplogroups found in [1] were detected in this study. No non-Caucasoid chromosomes were found.
The most recent and comprehensive study of Greek Y-chromosomes, by Di Giacomo et al., [9] included 154 individuals from continental Greece and 212 from Crete, Lesvos and Chios. In total, Greeks from thirteen separate locations were examined, thus giving the most complete picture of variation so far. A single haplogroup A chromosome was found (in Lesvos) which is usually found in Africa. The remainder belonged to haplogroups found in Caucasoid populations. The breakup (in percent) of the haplogroups observed) based on the set of markers typed is as follows.
P*(xR1a) R1a DE G2 I-M170 J2(DYS413≤ 18) J2*(xDYS413≤ 18) J*(xJ2) A Y*(xA,DE,G2,I,J,P)
12.8 9.8 20.2 6.6 14.8 20.2 4.9 2.7 0.3 7.7
A newer study by Semino et al. [10] has studied two samples of Greeks of size 84 and 59 (Macedonian Greeks). The focus was on two specific haplogroups E and J which are frequent in the Mediterranean region and can be used to detect population movements between Europe, Africa and the Near East. 2.4% of Greeks belong in haplogroup E-M123 and 21.4% in E-M78. Clades of E prevalent in Northern or Sub-Saharan Africa were not found. According to Cruciani et al. [11] most Greeks and other Balkan people belong to a specific cluster Ξ± within haplogroup E-M78 that is found in lower frequencies outside the Balkans and marks migrations from the Balkan area. E-M123 and its daughter haplogroup E-M34 originated in the Near East in prehistoric times. As for haplogroup J, most Greeks (22.8% Greeks/14.3% Macedonian Greeks) belong to J-M172 and its subclades which is associated with Neolithic population movements. Only 1.8%/2.2% of Macedonian Greeks/Greeks belonged to haplogroup J-M267 which could potentially (althought not certainly) reflect more recent Near Eastern admixture.
Thus, at present, in a total of seven studies, in which 925 Greek males were tested, one HG16, one HG28, one HG10/HG36, and one haplogroup A chromosomes have been found, for a total of 0.4% possible non-Caucasoid contribution to the modern Greek male gene pool. Additionally, the latest studies [9, 10] with a more refined version of the Y chromosome phylogeny indicate that influences from the Near East and North Africa in historical times are unlikely (perhaps in the order of ~2%). Additionally, Y chromosome haplogroup R1a which is very frequent in Slavic populations (>50%) is found in only around 9.8% of Greeks, and is also found at comparable frequencies further East (10.8% in Iraq; Al-Zahery et al. [12]) indicating that its presence in Greece need not be associated with medieval intrusions by Slavic speakers. The emerging picture of Y chromosome variation in Greece indicates genetic continuity, with slight influences from neighboring Caucasoid regions and virtually no influence from non-Caucasoids.
Future studies with larger samples and more detailed founder analyses will allow us to obtain a better pictures of Y-chromosome variation in Greece, Europe and the world at large. At present, it appears that modern Europeans share many of the haplogroups, while there is also geographic structure in the distribution. With the exception of the Northeast corner of Europe, all other European populations have very small traces of extra-Caucasoid genetic input(a).
[1] Rosser et al. (2000) European Y-Chromosome Diversity. Am J Hum Genet 67:1526-1543
[2] Helgason et al. (2000) Ancestry of Icelandic Y Chromosomes. Am J Hum Genet 67:697-717
[3] Malaspina et al. (2000) Patterns of male-specific inter-population divergence in Europe, West Asia and North Africa. Ann Hum Genet 64:395-412
[4] Semino et al. (2000) The genetic legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective
[5] Zerjal et al. (2002) Y-Chromosomal Insights into Central Asia. Am J Hum Genet 71:466-482
[6] Qamar et al. (2002) Y-Chromosomal DNA Variation in Pakistan. Am J Hum Genet 70:1107-1124
[7] Zerjal et al. (1997) Genetic relationships of Asians and Northern Europeans, revealed by Y-chromosomal DNA analysis. Am J Hum Genet 60:11741183
[8] Weale et al. (2001) Armenian Y chromosome haplotypes reveal strong regional structure within a single ethno-national group. Hum Genet 109: 659-674
[9] Di Giacomo et al. (2003) Clinal Patterns of human Y chromosomal diversity in continental Italy and Greece are dominated by drift and founder effects. Mol Phyl Evol 28:387-395
[10] Semino et al. (2004) Origin, Diffusion, and Differentiation of Y-Chromosome Haplogroups E and J: Inferences on the Neolithization of Europe and Later Migratory Events in the Mediterranean Area. Am J Hum Genet (to appear)
[11] Cruciani et al. (2004) Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E3b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa. Am J Hum Genet (to appear)
[12] Al-Zahery et al. (2003) Y-chromosome and mtDNA polymorphisms in Iraq, a crossroad of the early human dispersal and of post-Neolithic migrations Mol Phyl Evol 28:458-472
'''The alleged "Sub-Saharan" theory that FYROMian "scholars" (damn it, am I funny or what) have manipulated to prove their point'''
In numerous recent studies, the mitochondrial DNA of Greeks was examined and was found to be predominantly Caucasoid with only infrequent presence of "erratic" sequences from non-Caucasoid sources. Mitochondrial DNA ("mtDNA") is inherited from one's mother and is thus a good way to establish the maternal ancestry of a population.
The most comprehensive European-wide study of mtDNA is [1] in which 125 Greeks were sampled among thousands of Europeans. The Greeks and the Albanians appear in the "Mediterranean-East" category of the study. Greeks tested belonged overwhelmingly to the Caucasoid-specific haplogroups ("Seven Daughters of Eve" popularized by Bryan Sykes' book).
The "erratic" sequences include a Sub-Saharan African (L1a) sequence, which was derived from the Albanian part of the sample [2]. The other two sequences non-attributed to a European founder are members of haplogroups prevalent in Asia, M and D. Thus, the total percentage of erratics in the Greek sample was 1.6%. The Greeks, like most Europeans are fairly pure in terms of their maternal ancestry.
It is sometimes argued that the Greeks absorbed large numbers of Negro slaves or immigrants. There is no evidence of such an event in Greek mtDNA. If it ever took place, it was so limited in scope that not a single sequence in a total of 125 could be found.
== "Elefteritsa" ==
[[User:Isterbinski]], speaking of your grandmother and "assimilation" - by the way, her unassimilated Greek name would actually be ''Eleftheritsa'', with a ''th'' - would you care to explain to us whatever happened to the once thriving Greek community in what is now the FYROM? Monastiri (modern-day [[Bitola]]) for example was once a major centre of Greek culture and learning, but the Greeks have since been forcibly assimilated into the dominant "Macedonian" national(ist) project. There is no free expression of Greek identity, and the Greeks are not even included in the census. Where did they disappear to? Seeing as you work for "human rights", as you say, you should be more concerned with the situation facing minorities within your ''own'' country, should you not?--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 08:02, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::This is even funny and senceless to read. Firstable,my Greek origin was from my grand-grand mother and I never met her personally, because she died when she was about 55 years old. My grand-grand father, who was married with her runned away from Greece because their house was burned by the Greek hunta and their were shoot at.
:::After that they moved in Macedonia (the town of Bitola). No one changed her name. Elefteritsa (or any version of it) is not a Macedonian name. If they wanted to change her name, it would be something like Marica, or maybe Letka. Those are the closest Macedonian names to Eleftheritsa. If someone wanted to assimilate her, they would give her some of those names. If you write Eleftheritsa on Macedonian (with h in the name), it is hard to read it. Anyone who knows any Macedonian can confirm what you are saying is completely senceless.
:::No one ever tried to assimilate the Greeks in Macedonia. My wife has a employee in her school of languages of Greek nationality, who works there as teacher of new Greek language. She is about 30 and born in Macedonia. But, she never was anything else than Greek (mother and father both Greeks). Her surname stayed Cilimingas and her nationality Greek.
:::Greeks are included in the census. Everyone is. In the Macedonian census, you write your nationality by yourself. You are free to write whatever you want, you do not have options that you must choose from. Inform yourself before claiming senceless things.
:::Don't you preach about minorities in Macedonia. With the new constitution, every minority in Macedonia can use his own language even in the national parlament.
:::I am not some free lance human rights worker. I work for one of the biggest organizations in the world. And if you want, I can post you here more than 70 reports about breaking of Human rights in Greece just in the last 4 months. There is no Human rights organization which did not criticise Greece. From all the countries in Europe, you are in top 3 with most breakings of Human Rights.
:::On the other hand, you have changed every single name that sounded Macedonian. My co-worker Christos (again, from Greek nationality, living in Macedonia) has full drawer of examples like that. And he laughted out loud when he read this post of yours.
:::In this moment there are about 3000 Greeks in Macedonia, but 2000 of them are here because of work (there are many Greek firms in Macedonia). It is interesting to say that '''we do not have any''' report of breaking human rights in Macedonian from a person with Greek nationality in the last 11 years. The Greek firms here are even allowed to have the Greek flag in front of their offices. Do you know what would happen to anyone who tries to put the Macedonian flag anywhere in Greece? [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 08:47, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:The '''Macedonian''' flag ([[Vergina Sun]]) flies proudly throughout Greece. As for foreign firms flying their national flags, there has never been an impediment to this. As soon as firms from the FYROM start investing in Greece rather than the other way around, there will be no Greek objection to flying the Japanese naval ensign. When I refer to the Greeks in the FYROM, I am not talking about the recent arrivals who are there on business. I am talking about the ''indigenous'' Greek population that has been forcibly assimilated as ethnic "Macedonians". The ''official'' census figures [http://www.stat.gov.mk/pdf/kniga_13.pdf] recognise no Greek or Bulgarian ethnicity (what a joke), and the category ''Other'' amounts to a meagre 20,993 souls, just over 1% of the total population. Are we ''seriously'' supposed to believe that the ethnic Greeks, Bulgarians and all other ethnic groups ''combined'' amount to one per cent? Pull the other one, mate.--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 12:05, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::::There are only two facts about this issue:
:::::1)Macedonian census was not criticised by any Human Rights wach organization in the world.
:::::2) There is no Greek census that was not criticised by some Human Rights Watch organization. Just the organization that I am part of has criticised every census since 1950th.
:::::If you ever were in Macedonia, you would be sure that the human rights here, especially after 2003rd and the new constitution gives more rights for the monorities than most of the countries in European Union. This what you say here is completely hilarious.
:::::Anyone who is interested, can check this information online. [[User:62.162.195.235|62.162.195.235]] 18:31, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Yeah, yeah we know the story already, all your family and friends have personal experiences with the people you hate so you don't need to bring up any documented evidence. Your wife is Greek, your grandfather was killed by Greeks, your best friend is a working as a transvestite in Syggrou etc, etc. If you people don't break '''any''' human rights then what is this all about [http://www.newsline.com.pk/NewsJun2004/newsbeat2jun.htm]? Desperate nation that kills innocent people in order to kiss american ass? Or more Greek lies? [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 12:37, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::My wife is mexican, not Greek. But, I would not have anything against even if she was Greek. For 20 years of working for human rights, you meet a lot of people and you help a lot of them. That brings you a lot of friends. And about my family... it is quite big. There were cases in the past of even more than 7 children in my family.
:::If you really want to know, my organization (including me) was the one who was loudest in this case asking for a trial for everyone who was a part of this incident. I will not talk further about what happened latter, because I don't have any clue or pictures from the scene. But I know that even the 'War Crimes Tribunal' in Hague droped the charges on thic case. I am not a lawyer or a judge, so I can not say anything about it.
:::For those who don't know, just to repeat that this incident happened in the middle of the war in Macedonia, so it is hard to prove any human right breaking in that situation. Aldough, we (as a Human Rights organization) supported those doubts of breaking the Human rights, we can not confirm were they terorist or ilegal imigrants. Only the court can confirm you that. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 18:35, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
== "Human Rights on the Balkan" ==
For anyone who wants to learn more about the human rights in greece, here is google's results on the issue: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2Bgreece&btnG=Search
For anyone who wants to learn about the human rights of Macedonia, here is google's results on the issue:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2Bmacedonia
For anyone who wants to learn about the human rights of Bulgaria, here is google's results on the issue:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2Bbulgaria
For anyone who wants to learn about the human rights of Albania, here is google's results on the issue:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2BAlbania&btnG=Search
For anyone who wants to learn about the human rights of Serbia, here is google's results on the issue:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2BSerbia
For anyone who wants to learn about the human rights of Romania, here is google's results on the issue:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%2Bhuman+%2Brights+%2BRomania&btnG=Search
Compare by yourself. Every single country in the world has been criticised for violating human rights, but now you can compare by yourself and build an oppinion for the human rights in both countries. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 18:34, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
== And now for some REAL genetics research ==
You know I was wondering, since according to ''some people'' genetics are as important as to mentioned in the article, then why don't we all bring up everything we can? Mr Sterbinski brought something up but unfortunately it was proved to be a fraud. Now it's the turn of other people to put their cards on the table. What do you think of a research conducted by [[Oxford]] university [http://hgm2002.hgu.mrc.ac.uk/Abstracts/Publish/WorkshopPosters/WorkshopPoster11/hgm0533.htm]?
:::Cry as much as you want Miskin, but you haven't proof that the research I posted here is a fraud. You were talking to a completely different research and you tried to represent the link you posted here as denial of my research. Unfortunately for you, I found links of both researches and I found several other links that proof that even the research that you tried to deny (which is different than the research I posted) were pulled back because of '''political''' reasons. Even the Nature magazines admits that.
:::So, stop playing dumb and check the links I posted up here.[[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 17:59, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
''Pakistan lies in a region that has witnessed multiple invasions and migrations over the centuries. Alexander the Great invaded the Indian sub-continent in 327-325 B.C. and three northern Pakistani populations, the Burusho, the Kalash and the Pathan claim descent from Greek soldiers who were left behind in this region. The Burusho reside in the Hunza and Nagar valleys, which are located in the Karakorum Mountains and speak the language isolate Burushaski. The Kalash have been isolated for centuries in the Hindu Kush mountain ranges of northern Pakistan and speak Kalasha, an Indo-European language. The Pathan tribes inhabit the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan and the southern and eastern parts of neighboring Afghanistan. They speak Pushto, also an Indo-European language. To investigate the male-line genetic relationship between the extant Greek population (assuming that modern Greek are representative of Alexander's armies) and the three Pakistani ethnic groups, 16 binary unique event polymorphisms, and 16 multiallelic, short-tandem-repeat (STR) loci, mapping on the non-recombining portion of the human Y chromosome were typed in 910 individuals. The combination of the biallelic markers identified 7 stable Y chromosomal lineages in the Greek, Burusho and Pathan populations and 5 in the Kalash. Haplogroups 1, 2, 3 and 9 were present in all four populations. The M20 A to G transition (haplogroup 28) was found in all three Pakistani populations but was absent in the Greeks. This polymorphism probably originated in or near Pakistan as it has not been found at a significant frequency except in this area. Haplogroup 21 was frequent in the Greeks but in these Pakistani populations was found only in the Pathans. Based upon haplogroup frequencies, 65-88% Greek admixture was estimated for the Kalash, consistent with a Greek origin for a significant proportion of Kalash Y chomosomes. However, the Kalash lack haplogroup 21 chromosomes and appeared distinct from the Greeks based upon principal components analysis of haplogroup frequencies and weighted population pairwise FST values based on STR variation within Y Haplogroups. They clearly contain a substantial proportion of Pakistani Y chromosomes, illustrated by their high frequency of hg 28, and the true Greek contribution remains uncertain. Estimates of Greek Y admixture for the Pathans were about 10%, and for the Burusho were close to zero. Median-joining networks of STR haplotypes revealed considerable sub-structuring of Y variation within the Kalash and Burusho, and in particular the haplogroup 21 network showed that the Pathan chromosomes were closely related to the central Greek cluster. Thus a small Greek contribution to the Pathans seems likely, the contribution to the Kalash is unclear and no contribution to the Burusho could be detected.''
This research proves at least two things:
*Before the research: The academic society '''considers''' Greeks as the main ancestors of ancient Macedonians.
*After the research: The above consideration has been '''enforced''' on a scientific basis due to the results of the research.
Note that this research has a completely neutral character, irrelevant to Greeks or any politics whatsoever. Its purpose is to study the ancestry of the Kalash, Burusho and Pathans, 3 peoples of Northern Pakistan who are assumed to be the ancestors of ancient Macedonian colonists. Unless the Slavic crowd (FlavrSavr, Isterbinski) have some valid academic document which rejects its validity (similar to what rejected theirs), I don't see any reason to not mention it in the article. Remember, I'm only using your own logic. [[User:Miskin|Miskin]] 12:37, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::You obviously read only your own posts, Miskin. When will you finally learn the difference between the HLA genes and genes in general?
:::In the same time, I would point out that this is your own conclusion. I don't see the scientist from Oxford making any conclusions like yours. But the "mastermind" kid Miskin is more reliable than any scientist in the world, so we have to listen to him. Right? I don't know should I laught or cry at this nonsence, can not decide is it hilariously funny, or extremely sad because someone so young as you can be so closeminded and.
:::And, in this moment no serious scientist would say that there is not any connection between the antient Macedonians and nowdays Macedonians. There is connection between the Greeks and antient Macedonians too, no one denies that. But, it would be completely idiotic if anyone claims that the Greeks stayed completely clean nation, without any mixing.
:::The Balkany is very small area and many different nations and people with different origin live here. During the last 2500 years there was mixing between all of them. So, again, please stop playing dumb. People here can always read you. And with this aproach, I don't think you will get anyone listening to you.
:::Personally, I do not care what origin Greeks have. You can be anything you want to be. I just know that there is a proof that we are not just Slavic and that our Macedonian origin is quite mixed.
And if you have any mind that you still use, you would finally understand that the modern nations don't have direct conections to the antique people, no matter Macedonians or Greeks. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 17:59, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
== A simple question ==
If the modern "Macedonians" are the product of an admixture between ancient Macedonians and Slavs, as "Macedonian" nationalists claim, what is wrong with calling them [[Macedonian Slavs]]? Is that not what they are?--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 18:21, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::I will try to explain you, but let's try to keep it down, without any 'fights'. Me and you Theathenae can not solve this issue.
::Now I will explain you why it can not be acceptable for us.
::1)The name Macedonian Slavs is not what we are. We are mixure, which includes Slavs, but Slavic is not the only origin we have.
::2) Slavs got here 15 centuries ago. Any relevant scientist will confirm you that the modern nations are formed latter than the 14th century and they can not be connected directly with ethnicities that lived in the same area in the past.
::3) Macedonians is the only name we know, only name we have and the only name that we used. We identify only with that name. Using the name Macedonian Slavs is nonsence, because noone would write that his nationality is "Macedonian Slavs". They would say that their nationality is "Macedonian". So, what kind of nation "Macedonian Slav" is when noone identifies with it?
::4) Belonding to some nationality is a personal feeling. If I feel as Italian, it is my basic human right to be Italian. Maybe I won't have Italian nationality and passport, but I should be treated as Italian anywhere I go. So, if I feel Macedonian, it is my basic human right to be one. If I do not identify with the name Macedonian Slav, no one can force me to be one. That would be violation against the basic human rights. Wikipedia is in a funny situation now. It claims that there is nationality Macedonian Slavs, but there is no one who identifies himself as Macedonian Slav. On the other hand, Wikipedia does not include the nationality (Macedonians) which is identifier of 2,5 million people. I agree that there should be clear difference between the "modern Macedonians" and the "Antique Macedonians" (maybe even using these names), but it should not deny the name we have. Especially because that name is highly supported all over the world.
::Greece and the Greeks should understand that us beeing Macedonian can not be denial of their conection with the Antique Macedonians. Also, they have to understand that they can not have exclusivity ove the Macedonian name and history. But, we both (Greeks and Macedonians) have to understand that non of us has a right to claim direct conection to Alexander the Great and his people. The science does not allow that and denies any direct connection of modern nations with some ethnicities that lived in the antique time.
::Also, Greece should understand that Macedonia can not claim and ask for the Aegean part of Macedonia. That teritory is Greek and the population there nowdays is dominantly Greek. So, it is clear and simple: Aegean Macedonia's teritory is Greek teritory and it will stay that way.
::In the same time we should both understand that nationalistic politics and claims should be left in the past. Nationalists like the ones in Macedonia who wants the Aegean part of Macedonia back in Macedonia and like the ones in Greece who deny any Macedonian minority in Greece and their rights should be isolated.
::I hope I could help. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 18:59, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
:::I remain unconvinced.--[[User:Theathenae|Theathenae]] 19:10, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
::::Theathenae, I will write this comment, but please first read it till the end before making any conclusions.
::::This is not about convincing you and asking you a aproval for using the name Macedonians. That is simple reality. We don't know any other name that we identify with and that can not be changed. We simply have no other option. We changed our constitution, we changed our flag, but it is imposible to change our identity. That is not something that you or me can decide. That is something that was beeing shaped and developed for centuries.
::::I wrote this explanation because Ijust wanted to explain you that Republic of Macedonia and the modern Macedonians have '''nothing''' against Greece and we don't have any claims to teritories of Modern Greece, including the Aegean Macedonia.
::::Of course, no one is prepared to quit about the rights of the minority in Greece, but all those people are asking for is to have the same rights that any other country in the European Union gives to the minorities.
::::I will repeat again. In my opinion, the problem between Macedonia and Greece is not realistic. It is simple politics. As you can confirm, as far as I remember, we never were in war, or anything similar to it. Actually, we are 2 of the rare nations on the Balkany that never were fighting against each other (excluding the Balkan wars, but then the Macedonian people were not your real target).
::::All the problem is based on the fears of the Macedonians of the Greek politics towards the Macedonians from the time of the hunta on one side, and the fears of the Greeks of some hidden plans of Macedonia to ask for the Aegean part of Macedonia back. But, I am 100% sure that non of those fears are based on valid grounds. You know that 1/3 of the tourists in Greece are comming from Macedonia. I hope you had a chance to see that those people have nothing against you.
::::I give this problem 2 more years, maximum. Of course, all the problems will not be solved, but the main issue will be closed. [[User:I sterbinski|I sterbinski]] 02:16, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
== Caution:A genetic research ==
To all: I think I have explained my view on genetic researches and ethnicity quite clearly, ''4 days ago'' (Before Miskin was a part of this "genetic" debate), so for those who don't read my posts (and are putting words in my mouth), here it is again:
:Linking genes with national identities is dangerous. I knew about that HLA genes research all about it, but frankly, I don't believe it proves anything. That is why I have never used as it an argument. The involvement of the Macedonian crew in it, is ''indeed suspicious'' to me. ('''I, FlavrSavr actually said that, and I still mean it, though I don't believe their involvement is a proof that they were necessarilly politically motivated''') The one thing positive that HLA genetic research proved, is, in my opinion, that the national "purity" of modern nations is, and has always been, a ''myth''.
:Now, what is really dangerous in it, are indeed, the racist conclusions drawn from it "Oh, my nation is more pure than your Sub-saharan tribe". (So Theathenae, that is indeed a racist statement, but I'm still confused why you dislike our faces so much). Such genetic researches or sometimes quasiresearches are always followed by ''racist'' sentiments, although they might not be motivated by such sentiments. Just see what the site that VMORO has provided stand for: ''Essays on a new concept of racial relations that promotes the continued existence, independence and legitimate rights and interests of all races, providing a preservationist alternative to the racially destructive consequences of multiracialism''. '''Destructive consequences of multiracialism?!''' (I said that, as well)
:Of course, there is this new "ethical racism" (preservation of all races), that tries to avoid (in my opinion), the obvious link, between these guys and Hitler's ideas, but on the site, there are mostly concerns why the "Nordic race" is the one dissapearing. How "serious" these guys are, you can see from [http://www.racialcompact.com/partitionmap.html|this map for racial preservation of the US]. The website's list of "Estimated percentage genes of modern nations" is composed from god knows what sources. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 15:37, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm again confirming that until the Genes or HLA Genes Research are fully or generally accepted in the scientific circles as relevant in describing historical events and migrations, I suggest that a giant '''CAUTION:A genetic research!''' sticker should be put on them, ''especially'' because they can cause serious distortions in the (post)modern concept of nationality, by putting purely ''racist, "nationality by blood"'' arguments into play. So, until I get some strong proofs of the contrary, I strongly believe that national/ethnic identity is a complex phenomena, that cannot be, explained by genes. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 04:23, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
:As a citizen of RofM, I wish you would comment on Sterbinski's bizarre claims that the research is "unquestioned" (To quote Sterbinski: "Put here any link which says any research of this guy was denied scientifically"---that can be found in the Nature link), and his continued denial to accept what the ''Nature'' report implies. His subsequent links do not show what he claims (or thinks) they show. Not addressing this can be seen as tolerating his claims, and that can be seen as an indirect way of supporting his claims and his viewpoint. ---[[User:Decius|Alex]] 04:36, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
::Alex, I'm writing several paragrhaps, It is possible because of a software mistake, to accidentally erase some of your posts. Also, please don't rush in, I have several other issues to add. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 05:03, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
That, however, '''does not mean that we couldn't or shouldn't include those genetic researches''' in a Wikipedia article, given the fact the Wikipedia includes articles or parts of them regarding different beleifs or religions, that are not only just scientifically dismissed, but are also quite odd. The genetic issues are already added in the [[Palestinians]] ('''not Palestinian Arabs''') article. '''Our mission here is not to prove whether or not the same Genes or HLA genes investigations are true or false''', we should only '''describe, not prescribe''', in accordance to the [[NPOV]] policy: "The research A, conducted by X,Y,Z is claiming A,B,C, because of C,D,E. The research B, conducted by M,N,O is claiming, bla bla. People P,Q,R believe that the research A is proving bla bla, People, T,U,W, on the contrary state that ETC." --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 05:03, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
:Alright, please watch out for those software "mistakes". [[User:Decius|Alex]] 05:07, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
::I certainly didn't erase your posts if that's what you're implying. KissL suggested that what you viewed as Isterbinski erasing posts, could indeed be a deletion caused by a software mistake. And, again, I'm adding several other points, please be calm :-)--[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 05:17, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
I think that it is better that to be done (if it is done, at all) in the current [[Macedonian Slavs]] article (which should be soon renamed in to Macedonians (people)), because that is the article that specifically discusses the identity of Macedonians. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 05:09, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
:The comparison with religious beliefs would not apply, because we are dealing with science, but the comparison with the [[Palestinians]] article shows how Wikipedia will basically handle it (detailing the controversy and the standings of the conclusions, problems with it, etc.). I agree it should not be included in [[Macedonia]]. [[User:Decius|Alex]] 05:13, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
::''Detailing the controversy and the standings of the conclusions, problems with it, etc.'' But, of course. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 05:36, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
I_sterbinski, you are formally right when you are saying that Miskin's link does not refer to the Macedonian/Greek HLA Genes research, however it's the same Arnaiz-Villena geneticist and it's probable that he's using the same methods. So, I_sterbinski, I do beleive that you are actually wrong when you say that this research hasn't been disputed in the scientific community. '''It is indeed disputed'''. However, some Decius and Miskin, you have rushed in, because some parts of the scientific community actually support Arnaiz-Villena (''Note that I mentioned my personal POV about the issue''),and the links are to be found in the [[Palestinians]] article. An explicit support can be found here - [http://www.tufts.edu/~skrimsky/PDF/nature_genetics.PDF]. Also, note that the same Arnaiz Villena is not some clown in the scientific community, in fact he was a member of the editorial board of "Nature" until he was dismissed from the editorial board. --[[User:FlavrSavr|FlavrSavr]] 05:34, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
| 