This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject North Macedonia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North Macedonia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.North MacedoniaWikipedia:WikiProject North MacedoniaTemplate:WikiProject North MacedoniaNorth Macedonia articles
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
you cannot form consensus and make changes by having another user who agrees with you, and you should wait a few days until more people participate in the discussion, please avoid an edit war or I will have to report you, the version with "North Macedonian law" is the stable one for almost 3 years, another attempt to remove North was made on 26 June 2020, and it was reverted by @Number 57:
The last paragraph of Naming conventions WP:MOSMAC suggests "In all other contexts, both "North Macedonian" and "Macedonian" may be used on Wikipedia in reference to the country (e.g. a North Macedonian company, or the Macedonian economy). In the absence of a clearer consensus on which of the two to prefer, it is recommended to use the longer form where ambiguity might be an issue (especially on first introducing the topic). The shorter form can be used where the topic of the country is already established in context. One general example of this may include subsequent and repetitive references to the country in articles that are primarily about topics related to North Macedonia, its culture, and its people."
The article originally had it as "Macedonian law" until you changed it a couple years ago. Had I noticed previously, I would have reverted it as well. You cite certain pieces of MOSMAC, but what about "According to the official prescriptions of the Prespa agreement, the adjectival form "North Macedonian" is generally to be avoided."? --Local herotalk14:54, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia rules rely on the consensus of its editors, and the consensus is reflected by WP:MOSMAC. The prespa agreement determines the official names e.g. the Government of North Macedonia, and MOSMAC suggests to avoid both Macedonian and North Macedonian if possible, but this is only about official names. The "North Macedonian law" is not an official name and is not covered by the Prespa agreement. Carpaniola (talk) 19:29, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(saw this on ANI) From the close of that RFC 4. Adjective: What adjective should be used to refer to other entities from North Macedonia, not specified above? was closed as no consensus. Can I suggest changing the first sentence structure to avoid the adjective form? The laws of North Macedonia..., rather than North Macedonian law... -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 20:21, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Does this solve the problem of violating MOSMAC by some known users? I would be worried if we choose a solution that moves the problem to an other article where the same users will violate MOSMAC again. Rephrasing every sentence in wikipedia doesn't sound an option for me. WP:MOSMAC suggests "North Macedonian" especially on first introducing the topic, and this discussion is about the first word. Carpaniola (talk) 18:47, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm very for the lead to follow the article title, and from taking another look at WP:MOSMACNorth should definitely be used as per In the absence of a clearer consensus on which of the two to prefer, it is recommended to use the longer form where ambiguity might be an issue (especially on first introducing the topic). (my bolding). I still feel that we should avoid the adjective, if an editor then goes to other articles to continue the problem they should be report to WP:ANI. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 19:34, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You are continously mixing the adjectival form and the name of the country. Nowhere was the name of the country changed, the adjectival form is the subject of the discussion not the name of the country. The MOSMAC guidelines clearly permit the use of 'Macedonian' as an adjectival form. Kluche (talk) 22:00, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would strongly oppose relying on the title to establish anything which isn't also established in the lead. The lead should be self contained and not assume readers have read the title. That's sloppy writing and a flawed assumption. Nil Einne (talk) 01:30, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kluche according to your edits, the country should be Macedonia and "North" should be removed from everywhere, but wikipedia is not the right place to shape things. Wikipedia reports facts, and those facts are reflected in WP:MOSMAC and in reliable sources. If MOSMAC wanted to prevent the usage of "North" when the title includes the "North", I am quite sure other more experienced editors that you and me would have already done it. Common sense is a fundamental skill, trying to reinvent the wheel doesn't help. MOSMAC suggests "North Macedonian" especially on first introducing the topic. It's sooooo clearly written that you cannot miss it if you give a try and read MOSMAC. Btw it's very interesting that Ivanvram gave you "The Macedonian Barnstar of National Merit", a user who openly expresses his irredentist opinions on his talk page and participates in the discussion below. Carpaniola (talk) 18:36, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Carponiola, stop with the blatant false information and slander.
I have no where disputed that the name of the country is North Macedonia. I dispute what adjectival form needs to be used in this case. Context is given by the title, ambiguity is no issue, so MOSMAC permits the use of 'Macedonian'. A point which you have ignored multiple times.
About the barnstar - I have never espoused irredentist or nationalist views. It is also a gross misconception and overgenralization to assume that everyone who has a 'barnstar of national merit' (or similar) is a raging keyboard-warrior nationalist.
@Kluche: You can assume whatever you want in your personal life. It doesn't excuse sloppy writing when actually editing articles though, and it is sloppy writing to assume that editors need to know the title to understand the article. Nil Einne (talk) 11:52, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kluche: it's not for me to judge, MOSMAC makes it clear we do need the full name on first introduction for readers to understand. And if you want to change WP:MOSMAC you're at the wrong place. And if you're not willing to respect the consensus of MOSMAC, you're also at the wrong place. You shouldn't touch any articles related to Macedonia because if continue you'll be blocked. It as simple as that really. Nil Einne (talk) 12:09, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Nil Einne The debate here is what is considered context and what isn't.
Also in this specific case, there is no clear consensus (three editors for 'of North Macedonia', three editors 'Macedonian' and one for 'North Macedonian').
I fail to see how I would be a disruptive editor, per WP:DISRUPTSIGNS:
1. I opened this discussion after an editor voiced their concern, so I fail to see how I would be "editing an article or group of articles in pursuit of a certain point for an extended time despite opposition from other editors." I haven't touched the sentence in question sincd this talk has begun (I did edit the article - added a more up-to-date version of the "Law on Weapons".
2. In this case there are no sources, and to my knowledge none of my other sources which I have presented in different articles have been flagged for verifiability.
3. It is true that I have added "citation needed" tags in the past - but it has not been "disruptive cite-tagging", as the material tagged was not sourced.
4. I opened this conesensus discussion.
5. As I said previously, there is no clear cut consensus.
6. I have already addressed this WP:ANI.
Point-illustrating - I fail to see how I would be point-illustrating with MOSMAC, if you think I am, please by a means tell me why.
WP:LISTEN - As I said above, no clear consensus.
If you have any comments or concerns about my editing, feel free to go to my talk page, as to not clutter this talk with off-topic comments and replies.
The problem with any consensus formed here is that the discussion is about how MOSMAC should be interpreted, which is not something open to local consensus. This is why I suggested changing the sentence to not use the adjective form, as then MOSMAC is extremely clear on what should be used. Discussions on how MOSMAC should be interpreted in regard to the first use, when that first use is an adjective, should probably be held at a more central location. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 13:12, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The talk page of Ivanvram says that he comes from Macedonia, he uses the former flag of the country used by nationalists in North Macedonia and is prohibited by the Prespa Agreement as a national symbol of Greece (Vergina Sun) that is protected by law, he supports the irredentist concept of United Macedonia and admits "This user prefers his country to be called by its constitutional name: Republic of Macedonia.". Of course, the constitutional name is "Republic of North Macedonia", and Wikipedia articles are written according to WP:MOSMAC. Ivanvram igores MOSMAC very well, and I have no issue with him reporting false data on his talk page. But I am worried about the expression of those irredentist opinions in wikipedia articles. Kluche in an edit in ANI admitted that Ivanvram was the other account with which they were accused of coordinating edits. Carpaniola (talk) 18:25, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Carpaniola, this sounds like a prude passive-aggressive attempt to discredit an editor. All editors have the right to participate in a discussion.
Comment I have BOLDly edited the contested sentence to what User:ActivelyDisinterested suggested above, avoiding the adjectival form entirely. I did this to hopefully avoid any further conflict, because the above conversation is gonna get some people blocked if it continues much further. FrederalBacon (talk) 04:15, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A quick look at the edits of Local hero show that is involved in a lot of edit wars in an effort to remove North Macedonian from every article, and it's quite often the case that rewriting the sentence is proposed by other users who are not aware of Local hero's intentions. Was the problem solved? No, the problem was moved to another article, for example in this article about 10 people are spending a lot of energy to make a trivial decision in this article. Avoiding the adjective in a clear case handled by MOSMAC is like we give more space to certain editors to push their POV, and we will again move the problem to another article. Our solution should send the correct message to all directions and motivate all users who have good intentions to improve articles. I cannot see any other way of doing that except following MOSMAC that suggests North Macedonian especially on first introducing the topic. If we accept rewriting the first word of this article, then in which cases would we use North Macedonian as suggested by MOSMAC? Carpaniola (talk) 06:34, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dealing with users behaviour that is disruptive is something for WP:ANI, gather evidence as diffs and make a report. It isn't an appropriate discussion for an articles talk page. The sentence no longer contains the adjective form, so no-one can complain it's wrong as MOSMAC is very clear on that. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 10:41, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
