Jump to content

Talk:Nikola Gruevski

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

His book

[edit]

Could someone add something about his new book "The Way Out" (Кон излезот)? --AimLook 01:37, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gruevski's grandfather

[edit]

The sources i added state that Nikolaos Grouis fought with the greek army in Albania. The use of "antifascist" might give a false impression that he was in a partisan group or some other resistance formation. So i think the phrase "fought on the side of Greece" or "fought in the Greek army" is more accurate, if the references are accepted as reliable there's no reason to make changes which give a more vague meaning. I Also left the name unchanged as it was added in the first place, the correct transfer from Greek is probably "Grouios" from "Γρούϊος" taken from the monument which is depicted in detail in the second link. I'm not going to edit anything for the time being. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zakronian (talk • contribs) 17:13, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


"On the other hand Gruevski can be considered an "Aegean Macedonian", an ethnic Macedonian originating in Greek Macedonia" - No foundation behind this comment. Especially with a Greek grandfather from a Greek village. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.166.19.20 (talk) 20:01, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The undisputed facts about his grandfather from the references are that his name was Greek, his village is in Greece and had a Greek name and that he served in the Greek army. The Greek identity/origin is obviously disputed and these facts are not a clear proof especially if we consider in general that a hellenization process did take place in the region. So i guess this comment is for neutrality, maybe a restatement like " On the other hand Gruevski is considered an "Aegean Macedonian" in the Republic of Macedonia, an ethnic Macedonian originating in Greek Macedonia" would be better. I personally don't think it is so important, i wouldn't revert a deletion either.--Zakronian (talk) 05:06, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The source is biased, it's a pro-greek nationalist news outlet, and it is also irrelevant to mention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.53.35.202 (talk) 20:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Undue weght given to ancestry issue

[edit]

Articles about political figures should have a brief overview biography section (including "early life" etc., if there's anything notable known about that), and then concentrate on the person's political action and offices. Why does this article have its longest and first section on the history of his family? Sourced to a single Greek news outlet? Just because some Greek nationalist media have made this an issue doesn't mean we should give this much weight to it. The section can easily be cut down and reduced to one or two sentences. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just because it is not advantageous for the people of FYROM, in this instance, to make reference that his grandfather was from Greece with a Greek name and Greek ideologies, does not mean it should be left out of the article. It is important for historys' sake that every person of importance should have their ancestry identified. Once again your biased POV above shows the continual attempt by nationalists from FYROM to attempt to deny history. By avoiding the truth of his origins only shows an immature and uneducated approach to an otherwise professional encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellasforever (talk • contribs) 07:32, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Future's opinion. Jingiby (talk) 14:07, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gruevski ancestry sources

[edit]

Hello I made this account because I was confused as to why these sources are being misused:

  1. http://www.kanal5.com.mk/default.aspx?mId=37&eventId=56289&egId=13 The kanal5 source states "Proto Thema" (A greek source) is reporting Gruevski is half Greek
  2. http://www.dnevnik.com.mk/default-mk.asp?ItemID=E02741FE0CDEF14487FFB7338443B82A&arc=1 His ancestors name "Nikos Grujos" does not prove he was one ethnicity or another - considering their was a Hellenization process that occurred in Macedonia, Greece "Nikos Grujos" may in fact simply be a Greek translation of his original name.
  3. http://www.zougla.gr/news.php?id=4828 Again a Greek source, in which claiming fighting in the Greek Army proves he is Greek? It is well known ethnic Macedonians fought with both Greek Armies and Yugoslavian Armies depending on where they lived (Yugoslavia or Greece) and more ethnic Macedonians fought with Greek Communists.
  4. http://folders.skai.gr/main/theme?locale=el&id=87 Videos cannot and should not be used as sources, if that is the case Youtube will become a main source on here

I believe if Gruevski is indeed half Greek then non-biased sources can easily be found, therefore I believe these should be removed. ICONFIRMED (talk) 23:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I will remove the sources since no one has responded, please do continue the conversation when possible ICONFIRMED (talk) 18:03, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, this source (http://www.dnevnik.com.mk/default-mk.asp?ItemID=E02741FE0CDEF14487FFB7338443B82A&arc=1) states Greeks believe he is Greek while ethnic Macedonians still living in his former village state the village used to be ethnic Macedonians, but the village has been replaced by other ethnicities over the years. These sources will be removed ICONFIRMED (talk) 18:26, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are reliable, please do not remove sourced content. A Macedonian, a Greek. (talk) 05:06, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please specify why they are reliable, and who states they are reliable. 69.14.179.109 (talk) 17:48, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You have not responded to any of the comments "A Macedonian, A Greek", videos and biased one-sided sources are not considered reliable... indeed the sources are contradicting one another yet only one sources view is used in the article. ICONFIRMED (talk) 03:56, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thus, I will revert your edit, based on the evidence and your failure to show any evidence that these sources are indeed reliable... besides your own view of their reliability. ICONFIRMED (talk) 03:57, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are reliable, please do take a look at WP:RS and please do not remove sourced content, as this constitutes vandalism. A Macedonian, a Greek. (talk) 05:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have read the WP:RS and still do not view these sources as reliable; WP:RS states "publish the opinions of reliable authors, and not the opinions of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves" as is the case here on these topics, the Dnevnik source states the ethnic Macedonians in the village state Gruevski's fathers' village used to be ethnic Macedonian and over the years other ethnicities have moved into the area while the Kanal5 source only states what Proto Thema has written yet the Proto Thema source is not used on here. WP:RS also states "Proper sourcing always depends on context; common sense and editorial judgment are an indispensable part of the process" yet videos such as the SKAI source are being used as a source when it does not use sources itself. WP:RS also states "Like text sources, media sources must be produced by a reliable third party and be properly cited" yet as I have already identified the source is of Greek origin and does not use 3rd party sources within the video itself. WP:RS also states "Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, or promotional in nature, or which rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions" in which these biased Greek sources want to promote a particular point of view with non-objective conclusions about evidence. I believe this sources should be reviewed by a non-Greek editor and until then they should be removed. ICONFIRMED (talk) 01:19, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you want these source to be reviewed by a non-Greek editor, the way to do it would be to post a request at WP:RSN. Athenean (talk) 01:19, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds great Athenean, since I just viewed "A Macedonian, A Greek"s userpage and one must question the persons' bias with writings such as "I speak Greek like Alexander the Great did, not a modern Bulgaro-Serbian Slavic language like Gjorge Ivanov does." It is one thing to identify oneself as different, it is another to mock and purposely ridicule another's identity. I would gladly use your advice since I view "A Macedonian, A Greek"s objectiveness as lacking. Thank you ICONFIRMED (talk) 01:23, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean "mock"?? And since when it is a mockery to state a fact?? It seems that you are somehow against Serbians, Bulgarians and Slavs in general! It also seems you don't know how Macedonian language is classified, so please do read Macedonian language article before you accuse me. A Macedonian, a Greek. (talk) 07:01, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gruevski Half Greek? Then you wonder why no one takes Wikipedia seriously...

[edit]

The source that is used in the article was misused. The article from Kanal 5 says that the "Greek media reports that Gruevski is Greek". Gruevski or his father or his grandfather have never claimed Greek ethnicity. If you have proof, please provide a quote where they say that they are Greek. Gruevski's grandfather was born in Krushodari (renamed to Ahlada by Greek authorities in the 1920s) Aegean Macedonia, and like many other Macedonians he participated in the Greek-Albanian war. I don't see why this should be twisted into "Gruevski is half Greek". Bakersdozen77 (talk) 02:26, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Official Greek Institution Confirms Renaming of Krushodari to Ahlada in 1926

[edit]

I just provided the source from an official Greek institution called Pandektis: [1]

Bakersdozen77 (talk) 02:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:GruevskiBersulkoni.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:GruevskiBersulkoni.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 5 October 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:00, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Nikola Gruevski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:10, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

SilentResident: There is absolutely nothing wrong in using the {{ill}} template as X1\ suggests. On the contrary, this is a good example of a situation where it is suitable. With or without the template, the name "Boris Stojmenov" will be a redlink. Using the template does not post Gruevski's name in another language. It just creates a small "[ru]" behind the name. This is a subtle signal to tell two things: 1) There is an article in Russian about Gruevski, reached by clicking the [ru]. 2) It might be an idea to create an article about him (for which the Russian article may be a help).

We could discuss whether to put the template in the infobox or in the navbox at the bottom. I would suggest the infobox, but am open for arguments both ways. We could also discuss if the link should be made to the Russian or to the Macedonian article. I would suggest the Macedonian, since that is where he comes from. It is also possible to link to both with the code {{ill|Boris Stojmenov|mk|Борис Стојменов|ru|Стойменов, Борис}}, giving the result "Boris Stojmenov [mk; ru]". Perhaps that is an even better solution? --T*U (talk) 21:09, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If a red wikilink about a Macedonian politician has to redirect to another language, shouldn't it be better that it redirects just to the Macedonian one? [2] I could like creating our own article instead of cluttering the infobox wiht multiple language redirections too. --👧🏻 SilentResident 👧🏻 (talk ✉️ | contribs 📝) 14:32, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It would be great if you or someone else made a stab at an article. And the beauty with the {{ill}} template is that as soon as the article exists in English, the interwiki links disappear (or more correctly, are supressed and become invisible). As for Russian/Macedonian: Yes, my initial suggestion was to link to the Macedonian article. However, thinking a bit further, there is a chance that the Russian would be more useful for editors that are working on an English article, since more people know Russian than Macedonian. Therefore I suggest having both links until the English article is created. --T*U (talk) 16:16, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thats good to know. Done, added both languages just in case. --👧🏻 SilentResident 👧🏻 (talk ✉️ | contribs 📝) 17:15, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian Pronunciation of the name "Nikola Gruevski"

[edit]

Why is a Hungarian Pronunciation of the name Nikola Gruevski included in the article? Even though he fled to Hungary he still does not have Hungarian Citizenship and has no Hungarian ancestry, it makes no sense to add a Hungarian Pronunciation. --Ivanavram 00:16, 2.6.2023 (UTC)

I also don't understand the presence of this in the lead. --Local hero talk 01:34, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The man certainly has a document for permanent residence in Hungary, with which he has been legitimizing himself for years. It is possible that he will continue to live there for the rest of his life. Jingiby (talk) 02:53, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Novak Djokovic lives in Monaco, yet the French writing isn't in the lead, even though "it is possible" that he will continue to live there. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a similar example. Gruevski, to my knowledge, continues to post commentary only in Macedonian and about Macedonian issues. --Local hero talk 03:05, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, Gruevski is not leaving Hungary, so Djokovic's case has nothing to do with his. Jingiby (talk) 05:14, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Edward Snowden does not have his name in Russian. Julian Assange does not have his name in Spanish. Again, I don't think you can find a similar example to support this. Do we even have a source stating how his name appears on any Hungarian documents he may hold? --Local hero talk 14:55, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Without a source, this sounds like pure speculation. Also, is there any source on his on the Hungarian pronounciation of his name?
Either way, as for reasons stated by Local hero, I'm against this inclusion. Kluche (talk) 18:09, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you consider that his name should not be written in the language of the country that gave him asylum and protection, remove it. Otherwise, there are sources. For example: here, here and here. Jingiby (talk) 05:02, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Karakachanov

[edit]

Hm, User:StephenMacky1, after a careful reading of the article, I found that Karakachanov's name is also mentioned. What are we to do bearing in mind that he is a graduate historian? In 1990, he graduated with a master's degree in history. Karakachanov specialized in new Bulgarian history, new history of the Balkan states, and history of the liberation movement in Macedonia and Thrace. Since 2014, he has a doctorate in international relations. He is also a member of the Macedonian Scientific Institute in Sofia. He is the author of historical articles in some journals. Not that I'm a fan of his, but should the mere mention of his name mean a taboo for the content of a certain article with historical content. Jingiby (talk) 16:02, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. From what I can see, he's more notable as a politician rather than a historian. Even with all of these credentials, his controversial reputation cannot be ignored. This article isn't just about historical content, but also about a BLP and BLPs require strong sourcing. The claim is based on a primary source and journalistic sources (which attribute the claim to him). If it was mentioned and accepted as 'fact' by other reliable sources, I wouldn't be against its inclusion. This needs to be independently verified before it can be included. StephenMacky1 (talk) 21:05, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Karakachanov is absolutly not RS, despite all of his credentials, since he is an ardent Bulgarian nationalist politician. Just like there's Macedonian researchers which do have very good credentials yet cannot be considered RS.
I'm against the inclusion of this supposed claim, as it is currently only backed up by a primary source. Kluche (talk) 21:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nikola_Gruevski&oldid=1257028802"