User talk:Kromid

Undo

Personal opinion, a random claim or anything of the sort can not be written in Wikipedia's voice. That's just a NO. Revert your edit or try to find RS for the claim as soon as possible. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 03:20, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Bring up the issue in Talk:Macedonians (ethnic group). I am simply reverting it to the stable version. --Beat of the tapan (talk) 05:03, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

March 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 12:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

3.5 millions Macedonian speakers

Hi, in a contribution you've replaced the 2.5 to 3.5 as speakers of the Macedonian language: ([1]) Can you please provide us with the name of the book that you're quoting and the content of the provided page, so we can check if this data is properly quoted? Regards. --StanProg (talk) 11:02, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Check out Facts About the World's Languages: An Encyclopedia of the World's Major Languages, Past and Present by Jane Garry and Carl Rubino. You can easily find a pdf of the relevant page. --Beat of the tapan (talk) 11:27, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I searched, but I could not find that book or page as pdf or any other format. I think, that since you added that source you have read it beforehand. I suppose you haven't cited something blindly, without checking it yourself. Could you please be so kind and provide us with the content of that page so I can check if this even exists? Regards. --StanProg (talk) 14:04, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Right here: . And yes, I do take good care when making sure that provided sources do indeed support my edits. Beat of the tapan (talk) 06:12, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Really?

Is there really any need to slander me as a "racist" because I believe (based on the sources) that there's no basis to saying that today's Macedonians are native to the region? Like seriously dude...calm down. You can disagree with someone without resorting to that kind of childish name calling. All the best. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 06:37, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

You were arguing that ethnic Macedonians are not native because they are "Slavic". You are using this term in a racial manner to justify that they are not native when in fact "Slavic" is a ethno-linguistic term, with some authors supporting dropping the ethno part. Using race as justification falls into the category of racism and I don't expect that type of forum-level behaviour here in Wikipedia, especially if it is persistent from editors that claim to be neutral on the topic. Beat of the tapan (talk) 07:21, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Poor analogy. First of all, i never said anything, reliable sources did. Secondly, you accepted that korean mexicans are not native to mexico because they are korean. By your own logic you are therefore calling yourself a racist. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 07:34, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

There was no analogy on my behalf. Though just thinking about it, your korean-mexican analogy is actually applicable to the Greek Macedonians as many descend from migrants which settled on inhabited land only a few generations ago. That has nothing to do with race.Beat of the tapan (talk) 07:57, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

That's a very weird change of subject. One minute you're calling someone a racist with no basis, the next minute you're engaging in the exact kind of thinking which you criticized. My original message was to stress the point that you can engage in disagreements on wikipedia without the need to engage in petty name calling. I hoped that was something which we could agree on. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 08:09, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

Your recent editing history at North Macedonia shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Dr. K. 02:20, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Apologies for Rhomphaia

After reviewing the text again, you are right most of the info is redundant. You are right my apologies, I just re-added a small amount of info that I thought was relevant. --James Richards (talk) 03:56, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

That is fine, James Richards. I generally tend to push for articles to be more readable to the common reader and trimming out not-so relevant content is one way of achieving that. --Kromid (talk) 07:19, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Köprülüzade Fazıl Ahmed Pasha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albanian. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Quick Question

Hello, just wondering why did you remove * List of Macedonians (Greek) from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Macedonia? I propose that I add the list back, as well as list of ethnic Macedonians, list of Macedonian Bulgarians and list of Serb Macedonians. Let me know what you think. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 12:37, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't necessarily agree with your change. Check my comment in the edit history of Demographic history of Macedonia. I am for keeping the 'See also' list as relevant as possible to the article. Kromid (talk) 23:07, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Why don't you agree with the change? --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 13:37, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

As explained above. However, I am fine with your most recent changes to the page. Kromid (talk) 23:49, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Kromid I also pinged you on the Mijaks page, I am new so not sure if I done it right. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 13:55, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Old Church Slavonic

I don't appreciate you spamming me with warnings that don't apply to me according to the rules, it is not constructive behavior. I don't think you are understanding my point, sources 5 to 10 on the Old Church Slavonic page are examples of Old Bulgarian and Old Slovenian being used as an alternative name of OCS. I simply tried to make it more accurate while keeping Old Macedonian in the intro for good faith when I could have simply deleted it, Old Macedonian is not an alternative name for OCS but its a name of a regional recension. Are you here to improve Wikipedia for people or to push a nationalist narrative? I can provide the quotes of the sources if you give me some time. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 02:20, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Please bring it up on the relevant talkpage. At least other editors can contribute to discussion. Keep it mind if there is a disagreement, the stable version must remain until consensus is reached in talk page. Kromid (talk) 02:47, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Also sources 55-58 support it's usage as an alternative name of OCS. For example from source 58 (Benjamin W. Fortson. Indo-European Language and Culture: An Introduction, pg. 374),

"The Old Church Slavonic of Bulgaria, regarded as something of a standard, is often called old Bulgarian (or Old Macedonian)"

There is no actual mention here it is regional (even if it may seem obvious) Kromid (talk) 02:59, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Another issue with your recent edits is that; one can also mention in the lead Old Slovenian is regional too and Old Bulgarian is due to proximity to the Bulgarian empire, however that info is better reserved for the body. --Kromid (talk) 03:15, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Check sources 5 to 10, there is no mention of Old Macedonian as an alternative name for OCS, I will add the quotes for those sources when I wake up, also feel free to find good sources of Old Macedonian being used as an alternative name of for OCS. Also source 55 cites Macedonian as a language from the year 1790 onwards while Old Bulgarian from 900-1100. Also source 58 on page 431 says "Macedonian was not distinguished from Bulgarian for most of its history. Constantine and Methodius came from Macedonian Thessaloniki; their old Bulgarian is therefore at the same time 'Old Macedonian'. No Macedonian literature dates from earlier than the nineteeth century, when a nationalist movement came to the fore and a literacy language was established, first written with Greek letters, then in Cyrillic." The fact that Old Macedonian is the same as Old Bulgarian does not mean its not used in a regional context, obviously Old Macedonian is talking about the then Bulgarian dialect of the region of Macedonia but it wasn't used for Old Bulgarian in the rest of the Bulgarian Empire for example. Also in Comparative History of Slavic Literatures by Dmitrij Tschizewskij it says on page 26 "The brothers knew the Old Bulgarian or Old Macedonian dialect spoken around Thessalonica.". As I have already pointed out I am not arguing that Old Macedonian is not a term used but instead that it is a regional term rather than an alternative name for Old Church Slavonic.

In regards to your comment of "Another issue with your recent edits is that; one can also mention in the lead Old Slovenian is regional too and Old Bulgarian is due to proximity to the Bulgarian empire, however that info is better reserved for the body.", you are wrong, in the 19th century the terms Old Bulgarian and Old Slovenian were used as alternative names for OCS by multiple historians such as August Schleicher, Martin Hattala, Leopold Geitler and August Leskien and others before the more widely accepted collective OCS name was adopted instead. Find me reliable sources of Old Macedonian being used as an alternative of Old Church Slavonic because I am not sure who added sources 5 to 10 but they do not have evidence of Old Macedonian as an alternative name. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 03:58, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

I am talking about sources 55-58 - not all citation needs to be inline because that results into redundancies and bloat. Anyway the source I posted regarded it Old Bulgarian/Old Macedonian as a standard for OCS therefore it is an alternative name. Encyclopedia Of Indo-European Culture, stated that OCS "is based on the Thessalonican dialect of Old Macedonian". Again complications in nomenclature should be discussed in the body, while Old Macedonian is used in more modern historiography compared to others, the rest also face similar complications - it's a double standard to only single of them out, regardless of the span of their usages. Kromid (talk) 04:26, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok keep it to the stable version. No hard feelings my brother, hopefully relations between Macedonians and Bulgarians can be good again one day. --StoyanStoyanov80 (talk) 04:23, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

That's fine, however if you wanna truly push for your proposals start a discussion in the Talk page. Kromid (talk) 04:26, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to Request to Move discussion

Hi can you, please, move your vote under the proposal: Discussion — Preceding unsigned comment added by GStojanov (talk • contribs) 16:48, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Map

Hi. If you don't deny that the map is hugely incorrect for the age of Diocletian please allow me to delete it. Other maps in the article and that it's sourced (see WP:AGE MATTERS) don't influence this. Gyalu22 (talk) 07:46, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Hey Gyalu, I'd support the removal of the map if the other one is removed too since that one is inaccurate and has no real source. I'd also encourage finding suitable map that accurately highlights the regions under Diocletian. Kromid (talk) 10:36, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Gyalu22 (talk) 15:54, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Borza

Hi Kromide, I don't understand why you have reverted my edit. You are probably not following the discussion on the talk page. The problem is that there is no credible secondary source for this information. Based on the primary source at the moment, there is a dispute between me and the new editor, who added a previous version of the sentence under question. He claims that this very version that was reverted from you does not correspond to the primary source and denies any past Bulgarian connection to the modern Macedonians, which is frivolous. Greetings.Jingiby (talk) 04:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC)