User talk:Lantonov

French interwiki on Eigenvalues

I noticed that you are the editor du jour at Eigenvalue, eigenvector and eigenspace. I thought you might want to have a look at the French interwiki version of the page: fr:Valeur propre, vecteur propre et espace propre. It seems to have evolved in a very different direction, and perhaps some of the material there could be incorporated into the English article as well. Best, silly rabbit (talk) 14:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. The French version looks very, very good. I don't know French well but I will surely try to incorporate as much from it as I can. This will save a lot of work and will make this article a lot better. --Lantonov (talk) 14:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Physics participation

You received this message because your were on the old list of WikiProject Physics participants.

On 2008-06-25, the WikiProject Physics participant list was rewritten from scratch as a way to remove all inactive participants, and to facilitate the coordination of WikiProject Physics efforts. The list now contains more information, is easier to browse, is visually more appealing, and will be maintained up to date.

If you still are an active participant of WikiProject Physics, please add yourself to the current list of WikiProject Physics participants. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 15:49, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Physics Poll

There is currently a poll about WikiProject Physics in general. Please take some time to answer it (or part of it), as it will help coordinate and guide the future efforts of the Project. Thank you. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 18:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Nikephorus brutality

Hello, Lantonov. I was wondering if you could help explain a passage by Michael the Syrian when he wrote, "His savagery went to such a point that he ordered to bring their small children, got them tied down on earth and made thresh grain stones to smash them.” Could you describe that this means exactly? What are thresh grain stones? Thank your for any help you can offer! Dpattiris (talk) 01:50, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I did not insert this passage, so I don't know what the original contributor (Gligan, I think) meant by "thresh grain stones". I suppose it is "millstones", the round stones that are used in flour mills. As far as I know, the original citation of Michael the Syrian is in French. I'll look for it and will quote it here for exact translation.

I found the French quote in Zlatarski, p. 332 (secondary source) in a footnote. It is:

For this expedition of Nicephorus, and for his cruelties in Bulgaria, Michael the Syrian gives the following note:

"Nicephorus, empereur des Roumains, marcha centre les Bulgares: il faut victorieux et en tua un grande nombre. Il parvient jusqu'à leur capitale, s'en empara et la dévasta. Sa sauvagerie alla à ce point qu'il fait apporter leurs petits enfants, les fait étendre a terre et fait passer dessus des rouleaux à battre le grain." See Chronique de Michel le Syrien, ed. par J.–B. Chabot, t. III, fasc. I, Paris, 1905, p. 17.

I do not know French well but it seems to me that the literal (and bad) translation of "fait passer dessus des rouleaux à battre le grain" is "passed them under rolls for beating (thrashing) grain", probably "millstones". --Lantonov (talk) 10:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Dpattiris (talk) 22:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)Great! Thank you so much! That's very helpful.

Bulgarians

Hi Lantonov. The most added texts from Monshuaiin in this article are biased nonsences and do not correspond to the level of Wikipedia! Regards! Jingby (talk) 11:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

---

@ Jingby,

Ne te li e sram da narichash izuchavania ot Bulgariski anthropolozi i istoritsi "biased"... A koe ne e "biased" i li taka narecheno subektivno? Mojebi ti haresvash materiali pisani za pra-Bulgari ot Ruski i zapadni istoritsi v 19 i 20 vek kogato Evro-tsentrobejni politicheski tendentsii na klasicheskiat imperialisum sa suzdali obstoiatelstva poradi koito na dadeni lichnosti i natsionlani zad-granichni sili im e iznasialo da predstavat vsiako pleme sus koreni izvun Evropa kato varvarsko. Che taka i nie da budem prestaveni kato polu-varvari za da oburnem grub na chast ot nashata istoria i vuv sushtoto vreme da obiknem Slavianskite si bratia okupatori ot velikiat sayuz i komunisticheski raii.

Za razlika ot mnogo drugi hora, az izpolzvam akademichni materiali kogato pisha vuv Wikipedia. Ne moga da kaja sushtoto za teb Jinby. A che nie Bulgarite sme narod sus razlichni koreni e absolutna realnost, ot koiato ne biva da se sramuvame. Sushto ne triabva da se opasiavame da pokajem che horata/plemenata ot koito se e suzdal nashiat kompositen narod imat istoria i kultura, a ne taka narechena varvarska identichnost. Niama da razresha luji da se pishat kakto i samo stari perspektiviti da se pokazvat. Obratniat vraiant bi bil akt na neovajenie spriamo moiite pradedi, kakto i tvoiite, makar che ochevidno ne si dostatuchno zrial i li umen za da saubrazish svoiata naglost! Razbrali, i li si niakakuv samo-mrazesht Bulgarin sus kompleksi no bez kapka smelost i trudolubie cherez koeto da vlojish vreme i usilia da prochetesh vsichki akademichni perspektivi po vuprosa pod silata na otvoren i zainteresovan itelekt sus koiito da stignesh do maksimalno neutralni izvodi?!?

Jingby, zasrasami se i ne se opitvaii da govorish zad gurba mi (naprimer tuk vuv stranitsata na Lantonov) bez da me poznavash i li bez da si vidial sus kakvo sum doprinesal za Bulgarski statii vuv wikipedia. Tuk stava vupros da se predstaviat vsichki akademichni perpesktivi. Spodeli tvoiat neobrazovan perspektiv za informatsiata koiato sum predstavil, direktno na Dr. Petur Dobrev ot Bulgarska Akademia po Nauka (BAN), ta da vidim kakvo toii shte ti otgovori. Samo zapomni che toii e napravil poveche prouchvania za pra-Bulgarite, koito sa pokazani vuv knigi/tesi, ot vseki drug vuv poslednite dve desetiletia. --Monshuai (talk) 23:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Става ми тъжно като чета как се карате, защото и двамата сте от моя отбор и ви уважавам. Не искам и не мога да взема страна в спора, но от работата ви зная, че го правите за добро и се стремите да представите България в по-добра светлина пред света. Затова апелирам да загърбите персоналните нападки за това кой повече знае и дали една или друга теза е по-достоверна. По-важното е да намерим общ език и да се противопоставим ефективно на изопачителите на нашата история и зложелателите като ... (няма да споменавам имена, вие ги знаете много добре). Всеки от вас може да разчита на моята помощ и подкрепа. --Lantonov (talk) 14:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Lantonov, mersi za pomoshta. Bih iskal da te popitam kak se nakazvat hora koito premahat akademichni dokazatelstva? Ima niakolko chujdentsi koito vse go praviat na statiata za "Bulgarians" kakto i drugi svurzani sus nashata istoria... Prosto iskam da budat nakazani ot administratori zashtoto ni predstaviat pred sveta po naii loshiat nachin bez da uvajavat akademichni izuchavania. Blagodaria ot novo.--Monshuai (talk) 11:20, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Доколкото схващам от ръководствата, този процес е на етапи и изхода от него не е сигурен. Като цяло, нещата в тази област не са наред и поради тази причина се отказах да редактирам исторически и свързани с България статии. Имам предвид голямата разправия с Нострадамус и циничното му отношение към България и нейната история като цяло: "Левски е терорист", "Априлското въстание е сбирка на шепа смешници, които изпяли няколко новоизмислени песни", "българските селяни, окуражени от присъствието на казаците избили зверски 300 000 мирни турци по време на войната от 1878", "българите и техните историци предпочитат да живеят с измислена история за да заличат срама от турското робство" и пр. Много от тези измислици продължават да украсяват Уикипедия не без помощта на неколцина администратори, които се бяха засилили да наказват мен, Глиган и Лавеол затова, че не позволявахме да минат.

А иначе етапите са: първо, обсъждане на дискусионната страница (смях), второ: при непостигане на съгласие, искане за медиация от неутрален редактор, трето: при неуспех и на това, съобщение в WP:ANI, с обосновка. По принцип, по-ефективно от всичко това е човек да се обърне директно към отговорния администратор, но това е нож с две остриета, защото може да те накажат без да си виновен. Лошото е, че от миналата година има политика (WP:ARBMAC)по отношение на всички балкански статии за наказване на хора които водят "edit warring". Обикновено го отнасят невинните, а виновните се измъкват.

Все пак бих могъл да ти помогна по отношение на "трета ниша", ако ми кажеш кои от неговите идиотщини те смущават, за да подготвим обосновано опровержение и да се опитаме да минем по етапите. Колкото повече академични (имам предвид БАН, а ако има чуждестранни, още по-добре) публикации, толкова по-голям шанс за успех ще имаме. --Lantonov (talk) 06:21, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Zdrasti. Mersi za podkrepata. Moiite bitki produljavat. Osobeno edin Gruk e mnogo zainteresovan da predstavi Bulgarite kato nomadi i varvari. Kazva che "sources" bili "unreliable", makar che ne moje da chete na Bulgarski. :) Kak moje toii da ima argument ako ne gi e prochel? Oshte poveche, kak moje da iztriva izuchavania ot Bulgarski ucheni i vsushtnost chleni na BAN? Kajimi kakva strategia predpochitash za da ospeem da preodaleem segashnite barieri. Mersi i do chuvane...--Monshuai (talk) 06:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Когато се цитират академични публикации на български, за подкрепа на по-нататъшните спорове е най-добре цитата да се даде преведен на английски (авторите и заглавието на публикацията) като се даде българска транслитерация и се посочи че статията е на български (in Bulgarian). Особено важно е да се посочи че това е академично издание, напр. Bulgarian Academy of Sciences Publishing House. Хубаво е също така да се дадат специалностите и квалификациите на авторите на източниците като: historian, linguist, Ph.D. и т.н. По принцип, никой няма право да ти заявява, че източника не е reliable преди да е предявил заявление за verification. Триенето без основателна причина на sourced информация е вандализъм WP:Vandalism и това е инцидент, за който може да се съобщи в WP:ANI. При съобщаването се посочват точно местата на изтриването на sourced information. За съжаление WP:ANI не третира въпроси относно съдържанието, а е само на принципа: безоснователно изтрита някаква информация, за която са дадени източници. Въпросите относно "reliabilty" са ахилесовата пета на Вики и не случайно всички фалшификатори на историята вървят по този път. --Lantonov (talk) 10:56, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Pseudotensors

Hi Lantonov,

we're both rather interested in pseudotensors (you more than me to judge by the number of editions of Landau-Lifshitz that you have!). I'm curious as to what the reason for this interest is? Mine stems from the irritation of hearing people declare that conservation of energy is violated on cosmological scales by general relativity (e.g. by the process of inflation). Is that your concern as well, or is your interest purely "academic", if I might put it that way?

Just curious. Whatever the reason, it's great fun working with you. --Michael C. Price ^talk 18:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Michael. Thank you for sharing my interest in the topic. It has always been a pleasure working with you on these articles. I remember the time more than a year ago when we had very satisfactory collaboration on the same topics. I was dismayed when I learned post-factum that you have been punished on unrelated topic. I tried to argue this punishment to be lifted because your absence was a blow for the GR articles. There were no tangible results of this appeal. Anyway, I am glad you are back again and we can discuss these topics of mutual interest.

My interest in this is a case of a profession turned into a hobby. My original education and MS thesis is in theoretical physics, and the 10 LL volumes were the staple courses in university. Later, in order to earn a living, I had to focus in another field: molecular biology, calculation of molecular conformations, etc. and I made my Ph.D. diss in molecular biology; however, the interest in GR remained and turned into a hobby. I am interested in several topics in GR: one is the pseudotensor in connection to the energy localization and conservation, relation between matter and geometry, and so on. The calculational difficulties in obtaining 96,8 and 96,9 piqued my interest in the math/technical side of tensor calculation, and algorithms for tensor simplification, which is basically computer programming stuff. Another topic of interest for me is the quasi-isotropic model, and particularly the gradation of kinds of matter in it: from vacuum through radiation to several types of matter. Again the math aspect, and the feeling of some uncanny order connected with combinatorial sequences, is very intriguing. A third topic of interest are singularities, and the many enigmas connected with them. In this respect, the surprising generality of the BKL model (BKL singularity) is a very attractive topic to work on and discuss. Another interest are some purely math/geometry topics, as Curvilinear coordinates, Pseudotensor, Covariant derivative, Eigenvector, eigenvalue, and eigenspace. The challenge there is didactic: how to present them to the general public to be understood, and at the same time not to lose generality and rigor. I am interested also in some history topics (as a hobby) and finding the objective truth in some historic events. However, I dislike very much the passionate discussions that inevitably arise around these topics, personal charges, etc. that obfuscate the truth. So several months ago I decided not to be involved in history, and also in any topic that requires pouring charges and countercharges and becoming too much personally involved. I like to be more positive and helpful than threatening and disruptive. Because I see the same features in you too, I am very glad when I see your contribution in a discussion or an article. --Lantonov (talk) 07:22, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Lantonov, thanks for the reply.

I seem to be a slower learner than you, especially in regard to the futility of updating historical articles here. I naively thought that history would easy to work on in Wikipedia; frustratingly it seems to be one of the hardest. That's a shame because I find history fascinating, especially ancient history. The editing restriction I incurred for stepping on the toes of a few historical/ religious bigots did seem disproportionate in that it was all encompassing; if ArbComm felt my actions were disruptive to one article, why place a broader restriction? In the end, though, it made little difference; the reason for my reduced involvement over the past few months was/is mostly due a couple of breakdowns in my health, which I am only slowly recovering from. Studying GR was a very diverting distraction when I felt unwell; very much a case of every cloud having a silver lining.

Like you I enjoy the didactic challenge of explaining something rigourously but with clarity. And as a side benefit, as you have found as well, you end up understanding the subject better. GR is a hobby of mine now (I didn't understand it very much when I was at college, despite having Michael Duff as lecturer. Thankfully I took down a comprehensive set notes!). One of things I like about GR is way it illuminates, and leads you off into, other areas (a recent diversion of mine has been into the Dirac equation).

Finally, let me share an insight which has slowly penetrated my skull over the last 25 years. GR is a tensor theory because we wish to impose a general co-ordinate covariance on our equations. But their is an additional invariance that we expect any physical equation to satisfy: to be locally lorentz covariant -- and for that we have to use frame fields or vierbeins. Rewriting the equations or lagrangian in terms of the vierbein, by replacing the metric with the vierbein instead:

$g^{\mu \nu }=e_{a}^{\mu }e_{b}^{\nu }\eta ^{ab}$

leads to many simpler expressions, e.g.

$e={\sqrt {-}}g$

You can raise and lower indices with $e_{a}^{\mu }$

$T^{a}=T^{\mu }e_{\mu }^{a}$ etc

just as you can with the metric, but both invariances are encoded with the vierbein since:

$T'^{\mu a}={\frac {\partial x'^{\mu }}{\partial x^{\nu }}}T^{\nu a}$

under a general co-ordinate transformation and

$T'^{\mu a}=\Lambda (x)_{\ b}^{a}T^{\mu b}$

under a local lorentz transformation. Strangely, MWT hardly touch on the subject. --Michael C. Price ^talk 13:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I haven't dealt much with vierbeins mainly because I studied from older LL editions in University. Lifshitz found vierbeins to be important enough to include in the newer editions (section 98. The tetrad representation of the Einstein equations). I am (or was?) interested in Bulgarian Medieval History (Battle of Pliska among others) and other related topics. Nationalist sentiments in the Balkans run particularly high so I had very rough editing experience all the time. Political factions deliberately fill whole articles with falsified historical materials, Republic of Macedonia justifies its existence with newly invented history, Greece and Turkey deny whole history chapters, Romania pretends to have owned the non-Greek part of the Balkans, not to speak of Serbia ... In short, a can of worms. Whole sections, for which I have worked for months got deleted without explanation. When I tried to argue - first I got personal attacks, then admins got involved and so on, a living hell. In one moment, I sat and thought "I waste my time and web resources in order to be abused and punished. Why do I do it? I am supposed to have fun in the net." This realization helped me to quit. I am glad I did it because now I really edit happily and enjoy discussions with partners like you and JR. --Lantonov (talk) 14:26, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I hope you spotted the giant amphibian fossil (from Australia, DevonianMiddle Triassic) Paracyclotosaurus davidi just off the central area; the only representative of its species (and probably genus, for all I know). My favourite fossil.

I forgot to mention earlier the punchline with vierbeins: varying the action w.r.t. the vierbein field yields the standard Einstein field equations, but, additionally, varying the action w.r.t. to the spin connection gauge field ($w_{\mu }^{ab}$ in my response to JRSpriggs) yields an analogous equation for torsion, complete with a spin connection current density.--Michael C. Price ^talk 18:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

To the right of the giant diplodocus skeleton in the central hall. Yes, I have seen it. I have been in the Natural History Museum many times (more than 10) in connection with my work. We have a joint molecular phylogeny project in anthropology (Sofia University Department of Biology and Institute of Anthropology at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences from Bulgaria, and the Natural History Museum and the British Museum from UK) as a part of the European Framework Program. In the Natural History Museum the centerpiece was the realistic T. rex at the end of the 1st floor wing - natural size, roaring, and grabbing around. I had the feeling it will sweep me with its tail. In the British Museum, the central theme is Hadrian expeditions and conquests. I was there last month (24/6), again on business, but found some time to look around at the exhibition (Hadrian). Otherwise, I know the anthropology exhibits in the two museums better than many of their employees having pored over details of each of them, looking at the DNA analyses, and calculating phylogenetic relationships. Not as exciting as GR but bread-earner.

It would be very interesting if 96,8 and 96,9 (the LL pseudo) are derived in vierbeins from the Einstein equations. The latter as you know are in vierbeins in LL chapter 98. Should be possible. --Lantonov (talk) 15:46, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

That sounds a pretty neat job. I like the way that DNA / molecular techniques cast new light on evolutionary relationships, even stuff so remote that we have no fossil evidence to go on (such as the evolution of chloroplasts or mitochondria). I was very amused when it revealed that fungi are more closely related to us than they are to plants. I tried visiting the British museum a few months back, but I had to leave because of the infernal heat. Nice place though -- must try again in the winter.

I don't think the vierbein techniques make any difference to anything derived from the field equations, since the field equations can be derived from vierbeins (just as well, or we would have big problems). I guess, therefore, that all the LL pseudotensor stuff is unaffected. What would be interesting would be to see if there is an analogous set of pseudotensors corresponding to the torsion / spin connection field equations. My guess is that there would be, but perhaps it encodes no more than conservation of angular momentum. --Michael C. Price ^talk 05:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Meetup

Lantonov - you've previously expressed interest in a Chicago wiki-meet. If you're interested in coming to another one, take a look at Wikipedia:Meetup/Chicago 3 and let us know your thoughts. best — Dan | talk 18:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Solun-Voden dialect

Hi! I am not very familiar and therefore I want to ask you - Are you sure that the dialect from the villages east from Solun as Zarovo and Visoka are actually a part from this dialect? Aren't they a part a those dialects, widespread between Nevrokop and eastern part of region of Solun? Regards,--JSimin (talk) 22:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I am sure about this. There are 2 Slavic dialects east of Solun: Drama-Ser dialect to the north, and Solun dialect to the south. Both are part of the Rupian dialect massif but Drama-Ser is closer to the typical features of this massif, and respectively, closer to Nevrokop. Please read the sources that I have given in the discussion.

Especially, for Solun dialect: It is spoken in the Solun neighborhood, best represented in the villages of Visoka and Suho, near Lagadin, to the north of Solun. In addition to these, similar dialect is spoken in the villages of Negovan, Gradobor, Ayvatovo, Novo selo, Balevits, Kirechkyoy, Kliseli. For Drama-Ser dialect: To the north of the Solun dialect are the dialects of Drama, Valovishta and Ser which are a transition to the Gotse Delchev (Nevrokop) dialect. These quotes are from the "Bulgarian dialectology" by Prof. Stoykov. The map given is not correct in the details because it completely misses the Drama-Ser dialect which is recognized by both Bulgarian and Macedonian linguists as different (or at least transitory) from Solun dialect. Visoka and Suho are the most typical villages for Solun dialect.

Regards. --Lantonov (talk) 05:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll see the sources in the discussion page. I am agree that the map is not correct. However I have to explain my doubts. The concrete article is about the dialects between Solun and Voden (or if we use the terminology of Stoykov between Kukush and Voden). As you state, the dialect of the vilages east (norteast) from Solun as Zarovo and Visoka is a Rupian dialect. Can we say the same about the dialect west of Solun to Voden? Stoykov describes both dialects as separate - Kukush-Voden and WestRupian - Solun and Drama-Ser(es). As I understood under "Solun dialect" he means only the vilages east or north of Solun. The dialect in the hinterland of Solun, west of the town isn't included in this dialect. On the contrary, he includes the dialects from Lower Vardar in the group of Kukush-Voden dialect. Regards, --JSimin (talk) 12:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

You are correct, Solun and Kukush-Voden are different dialects according to Stoykov. Kukush-Voden does not belong to the Rupian dialects and it has distinctive features that distinguish it from Solun dialect. --Lantonov (talk) 15:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

hello, lantonov i have seen your extensive contributions to the Solun-Voden dialect. I thank you for your addition. I am a bit puzzled though. You have added a complete Bulgarianized version of every dialectial and lingual fact you have added. Why is this necessary for a dialect which even covers a part of the republic of Macedonia. The dialect is wide strechting and extends almost to Florina. I do not see why the Bulgarian comparison is necessary at all. We are not comparing to the dialect to just Bulgarian. It is also interesting to use the old and outdated texts which do not reflect todays situation. Would you be willing to cooperate to Wikify the article and to de-bulgarianise it? It is way to POV at the moment.

Also i am interested by this claim. Retention of diphtongs шт, жд as in Standard Bulgarian, as opposed to *tj, *dj in Serbian, Macedonian, and some Western Bulgarian dialects: къшта (bg:къща), плàштъм (bg:плащам), нуштà (bg:нужда), в’èжди (bg:вежди), миждỳ (bg:между), сàжди (bg:сажди).

The same dipthongs are used in the Western Macedonian Dialects; especially around Mavrovo, Debar, Struga. Куќа → Кушта, повраќање → повраштање. Ќ often turns to ШТ. Ѓ often turns to ЖД. These features are not a Bulgaria only phenomenom. The Western and South-Easten Macedonian dialects are known for bieng conservative; they have kept many similar features. The POV should be deleted when you have time to fix it up. And by any means the Maleševo-Pirin dialect is a lot better. PMK1 (talk) 07:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

You are free to add this information above for the modern Macedonian language. For instance: къшта (mk:куќа, bg:къща), etc. I do not care about the order, put mk first if you insist. I recognise the historical fact that part of what was south-western Bulgarian dialects since 1945 became officially a Macedonian language. I am not interested to argue if this or that dialect is more Bulgarian, or more Macedonian. Especially for those dialects that are now in Greece there are hardly any speakers left whether they call themselves Macedonians or Bulgarians. The information that I have added is taken from "Bulgarian dialectology" of Prof. Stoykov, which is academic book and treats linguistic questions, not BG vs. MK controversy which is a political question. In that book there are refs to MK linguists, too, like Vidoeski, Topolinska, Golomb and others, so references to them in Wiki are fully acceptable and relialable as long as they treat linguistic topics.

The info that you gave above that in MK dialects (in Rep. MK) there are шт, жд diphtongs surprises me a little in view of the Blazhe Koneski book on the Macedonian language in which he writes that *tj, *dj fusion is one of the 2 characteristic features of Macedonian language which distinguishes it from Bulgarian. On the other hand, it is not so surprising because it can be only added to the many inconsistencies in Koneski. BTW, in Bulgarian dialects there is also *tj, *dj fusion not only in the region of Macedonia, but also in the regions of Shopsko, Graovo, Znepole, and Western Moesia.

The difficulty comes from something else: BG and MK dialectologies are not completely overlapping. This is evident in the different names of the dialects but this is only a cosmetic problem. There is a more serious problem, exactly with the Solun-Voden (MK dialectology) dialect. In BG dialectology, this dialectal area overlaps with the Kukush-Voden dialect (Kukush is north of Solun). Solun dialect (in BG dialectology) overlaps with the modern Thessaloniki demos (in Greece) and is more similar to the Ser-Drama dialect. Solun and Ser-Drama (in BG dialectology) are grouped in Western-Rupian dialects but are still very different linguistically from each other. MK dialectology puts the whole Western-Rupian group in one dialect: Nevrokop-Ser-Drama.

Therefore, the information that I added is misleading because it describes another dialect: the Solun dialect (proper) which is present only in BG dialectology. I realised this after I put the information (see the duplicate section 'Solun-Voden dialect' above). I am considering to change this. Maybe the proper way to do it is to make a separate article Solun dialect, put the linguistic info in it, and then substitute the info in the Solun-Voden dialect with the true linguistic info pertaining to Kukush-Voden dialect. In the intro it is said already that Solun-Voden (MK) = Kukush-Voden (BG). What is your opinion about this? --Lantonov (talk) 09:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

It is encouragaing that you are willing to cooperate. Yes, the Macedonian language has many dialects which lead to great variance in the spoken form of the language. I wouldn't say that the Macedonian grouping is to large as their are also sub dialects in this group (Suho-Visoka dialect for example). I couldn't imagine the difference between the language spoken in Kukush and Solun to be of to great difference. The dialectial differences are not the varied in that part of Macedonia. I believe that the current grouping should be kept for now and you are right the naming is more of a cosmetic problem. I wouldn't exactly call the Videoski book inconsistent but i would say that there is great variation even between villages in some cases. It is also interesting that the *dj and *tj also occurs in many bulgarian dialects as you just explained to me. I gave the struga-debar example but do not take me the wrong way Ќ does not always turns to ШТ and Ѓ does not always turns to ЖД. Maybe this is an older slavic influence which was later codified by the bulgarians but not in 1944 by the macedonians. I'm not sure about the comparison after every single local word, it makes the page look a bit unprofessional and crowded. Perhaps a section at the end of unique words to the dialect which show significant differences to the standard languages not just one vowel о → ь difference but rather words which are incomprehensible to outsiders? I think that the intro is sufficient and further moves to create a seperate Bulgarian dialect of Solun is at the least questionable and controversial. But generally good work with the article, i just think it needs a bit less POV points and it will be a good article for wiki. PMK1 (talk) 10:57, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lantonov, could you explain exactly what the apostrophes and diacritics (grave accents in particular) are meant to represent? Мерси. BalkanFever 10:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Sure. ` is stress, and ' is ь (bg) or j (mk). Maybe in some examples there is no need for the ` though. Oh, I see, ê is something in the middle of йе (bg) je (mk) and я (bg) ja (mk) which corresponds to the old letter Yat. --Lantonov (talk) 10:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah, like in Russian. I don't think stress needs to be noted when it's not of particular relevance, such as in the morphology section. With the softness (palatalisation I assume), could we use ʲ as with IPA? Also, I think the main way to render yat is ě (e with háček, as opposed to circumflex). BalkanFever 11:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem using ʲ . I don't have time right now for extensive editing but I have to completely change the article because as it stands now, it is misleading (I mean lingustically, nothing to do with the BG vs. MK bickering). --Lantonov (talk) 11:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll let you take care of that and afterwards I'll make some technical (orthographical) changes. Cheers. BalkanFever 11:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

To PMK1. I still think that the best way to stick to the truth and keep conscience clean is to include only what is written by academic linguists, whether BG or MK. We should try somehow to reconcile different views, and where impossible, to include both (or all) views but strive to include as much true info as possible. In this respect, any attempt to de-Bulgarize or de-Macedonize is completely counter-productive, because it further facilitates Hellenization. --Lantonov (talk) 12:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

That's a good point, however it does seem a bit example-heavy if you know what I mean. What information is conveyed in 20 examples that isn't conveyed in 5? And I'm talking about after standard Macedonian equivalents are added. BalkanFever 12:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Repeated examples that add nothing to understanding can be deleted, of course; however, many of the individual features of a dialect come in several subtypes which are best represented if we have an example for each. A case in point is шт, дж → *tj, *dj transitions in Solun(Kukush)-Voden which come in surprisingly many variants. You will see them when I include the proper info for this dialect (which is absent at the moment). --Lantonov (talk) 12:58, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem. And I know you mean жд, not дж (џ) BalkanFever 13:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, жд, sorry. между → меѓу. --Lantonov (talk) 13:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I anticipate your changes and can tell in advance what they are: you want to substitute ъ with ' and й with j. However, this is not correct phonologically because both stressed ъ (ъ`) and unstressed ъ are actually pronounced as vowels (they come from different OCS letters) while ' denotes omitted sound which is not pronounced at all while the consonants before and after it fuse. This is a very prominent feature in Serbian (cf. брдо, actually б'рдо where they don't pronounce ъ at all). As for й, I already made important concession with ʲ . Putting j is ambiguous because in many Western languages (including English) it is read as дж. So й seems best compromise (note that I do not use the Bulgarian and Russsian, in fact Old Slavic, ю and я but instead substitute them with йу and йа). --Lantonov (talk) 16:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Umm, not exactly. The ъ is used to represent an actual vowel - I have no problem with that. Unfortunately it isn't very compatible with diacritics, like for nasalisation. With й, I wasn't very sure how to go about that, but the ambiguity isn't a problem, since many Cyrillic letters look like Latin ones: eg. х looks like x. I don't know why we're using Cyrillic anyway; it would be better to use the Latin transcription (like in Proto-Slavic language), or IPA, but the latter is more confusing to some. BalkanFever 10:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I am convinced that you are actually willing to help and post bulgarian propaganda. You obviously have a wide range of knowledge on the subject. It think that some disputes may occur as the dialect is now bieng classified as bulgarian as well after a concensus was established that the Malesevo-Pirin and Ser-Nevrokop were to be the transitional dialects. Especially since the dialect is even spoken in the dojran and gevgelija regions. I would take the major comparisons off the bulgarian language and set the standard to the macedonian language. Whereas the other two dialects (pirin/serres) should have equal treatment due to their disputed status. Now i will let you reply to that before making any changes. Also according to Stoykov is the Solun-Kukus dialect the last Bulgarian dialect? Or does the bulgarian language continue on into voden and kostur?

Now, the article looks better with the changes. I think some italics would also be helpful to distinguish the various clauses. If you dont mind i would like to reword it. Also the ь sound is often stated in Macedonian as just an apostrophe. ie. bьrgo goes to b'rgo. (mind the multi-alphabets.) Also the й is bieng used a lot are you meaning more of a i, j or a ї sound? The different prnounciations can be confusing. Please give me feedback. Also you might want to talk to fellow editors on this page they seem to think that even torlacki govor is bulgarian. PMK1 (talk) 03:10, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

To PMK1: I told you that I am not interested in discussing what is Bulgarian and what is Macedonian. The fact is that all those dialects as far west as the Albanian mountains have been dialects of the Bulgarian language for many centuries. Part of the south-western Bulgarian dialects were raised to the status of official language under the pressure of Serb-dominated Yugo communists only in 1945. Although I have tons of serious historic literature about it, I am not interested in that either. If we are talking of sticking to some national standard language, it should be the Bulgarian standard language because these dialect have been formed in long history with a dialect continuum inside the Bulgarian language when Macedonian language did not exist even as an idea. I am not doing this either. I am trying to present both Bulgarian and Macedonian linguistic publications and find some middle ground to put information on the dialect itself, the language, the words, its linguistic characteristics. Strongly biased political views as you are trying to push are not to my taste. If you have some reliable, academic information on the dialect, which is not present in the article, put it wherever needed, and I agree to discuss it reasonably.

About torlacki govor, well, I think that Krste (or Kr'ste) Misirkov have gone too far to consider it a (purely) Bulgarian dialect. Torlacki is considered by serious linguists (including Bulgarian ones) as a transitory dialect between Serbian and Bulgarian languages which to the north-west has more Serbian features while to the south-east Serbian and Bulgarian are in equal parts at best. In the article now is "was considered Bulgarian".

To BalkanFever: On the question of IPA, I fully agree, and was even going to propose it myself. It will serve 2 purposes: first, go some way to reconciliation (why Bulgarian and not Serbo-Macedonian letters?), and second, it will be (hopefully) more understandable to international readers. This is an English Wiki after all. All the more that IPA has all the symbols we need. --Lantonov (talk) 17:14, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

My apologies i did not attempt at pushing any propoganda as i wrote further up "I am convinced that you are actually willing to help and post bulgarian propaganda" i actually meant to write "I am convinced that you are actually willing to help and not post bulgarian propaganda". I believe that you have done a good job on the Bulgarian Dialects page. You have also seriously attempted to change many articles to the benefit of the reader. About pushing political veiws it does no come to my taste either. Good Job on the articles. PMK1 (talk) 09:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

It's my misunderstanding. Sorry for peppering you. I do not pretend to have entirely NPOV view because this is impossible. I write from a POV that is close to the Bulgarian position. I suppose that you have a POV that is close to the Macedonian position. This is normal and so it should be. On the question of the language there are two other strong and hotly defended POVs: Serbian and Greek. All this is more in the political sphere. In questions of linguistics, facts are more important than POVs. I give facts that support my POV and that are found in serious linguistic literature. I accept facts that support your POV and are also found in serious linguistic literature. Non-facts or deliberate misinformation have no place here irrespective of which POV those support. That way I hope we reach some balance that is approximating the objective truth.

BTW, Republic of Macedonia has Prof. Kosta Peev from Strumitsa (Strumica), a highly respected authority both in RM and in Bulgaria for his 2-volume book on the Kukush dialect. He is a student of another great linguist - Bozhidar Vidoeski.--Lantonov (talk) 10:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Here is an interview with a woman who is speaking the solun dialect. If it is of any interest to you? http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=DsERAQeZePo

(and no im not trying to push propaganda it just happens to be a good example of the dialect :). PMK1 (talk) 09:53, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I looked through it but unfortunately I don't have speakers with me in the moment. I'll listen to it when I get home. Since she says that she is from Solun (the town), there are at least 3 possibilities: (1)Solun dialect (the proper one, with deeply nasal vowels, etc.), (2)Kukush-Voden (Solun-Voden) (with the characteristic reflexes), or (3)some other dialect (if she originally was from somewhere else). --Lantonov (talk) 10:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I listened to the video. The voice is not in sync with the picture so I am not sure that the woman is speaking herself. In the dialect spoken there are not even traces from Solun left. It is closer to the Bitola-Prilep dialect which in turn is close to the official language norm in RM. Either the woman lost her dialect from long stay in RM, or the recording is not authentic, I am not sure which. Probably she lost her dialect. --Lantonov (talk) 18:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I was pointing to features such as from 1:00 to 1:04 about her pronounciation and her accent on words such as devetta. 1:16 me zemaa ot školo. 1:27 godinki nemaf. 3:06 ot taj na taj. 3:16 praveite/ правейте. accent on zakola i otepa 3:23. 4:14 ručok there are just a few features which would believe me to think that those features are in the solun accent. please tell me if i am wrong or if you did not pick those features up? PMK1 (talk) 06:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

If by Solun dialect we understand the Kukush-Voden dialect, the above does not fit it well. For instance, retention of h in the middle and end is important in Kukush-Voden, meaning that it sould be zemaha not zemaa, nemah not nemaf and pravehte not pravejte. The substitution of ъ with ɔ instead of a (rutʃɔk) is also a characteristic of Kukush-Voden but it is found in a number of other dialects in eastern and central Macedonia (and some in Bulgaria) too. On the other hand I don't hear the very important vowel reduction: gudinki instead of godinki. Maybe she adsorbed a in devetta if by this she meant devetata. So if it is Kukush-Voden the last is a slight indication about it. --Lantonov (talk) 16:59, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Would those features lead to to believe that her dialect is more of the kukush-voden area? also can you rephrase this please ъ with ɔ instead of a (rutʃɔk) my computer is not recognising the symbols. Also are we sure that she isnt saying gudinki, i will take a closer listen but i am pretty sure it is godinki. Also what is your opinion on praveite/ правейте and her accent in general it sounds very aegean or eastern. PMK1 (talk) 08:41, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

My general impression is that she speaks something close to 'Central Macedonian' if there is such thing at all. Closer to reality, it is more Bitola-Prilep dialect but not pure of this either. Mixed are some other dialects, one of which is maybe Kukush-Voden (by absorption in 'devetta'). 'Pravejte' is not Kukush-Voden ('pravehte') but it is Eastern: can be Ser-Drama but also characteristic for Dupnitsa, Kustendil, and Rup (Bansko, Razlog, Velingrad). ɔ in (rutʃɔk) is a round, frontal and clear 'o'. --Lantonov (talk) 09:53, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I must have been wrong. Thank you for helping me understand more of this dialect. PMK1 (talk) 10:36, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

vevcani-radozda

You have adrssed my concern about the dialect. The book by hendricks is a very good book on the dialect and everything concerned about it. i was just curios as to how the ya would ever replace the e, especially in radozda (where i have spent much time and never heard the swtich!). I am also curious as to the Korca dialect, i would be shocked if a e → ya occured. Do you have any info on the dialect which i could have a read of? PMK1 (talk) 05:49, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

In Radozda-Vevcani there is no e to ya switch. No one says this. Miletic and Conev write that in this dialect ѫ (nasal er) or ъ (er golyam) is replaced by ѣ (the Yat vowel). This is very untypical and rare, localized only to regions with one or two villages. Not the usual Yat isogloss at all. This is why I replaced the "Yat isogloss" with "Yat vowel" yesterday. Further, this Yat behaves very strangely there, having different pronunciations depending on the preceding consonant. A similar phenomenon is observed only in two other (also very local) dialects in Eastern Bulgaria and that's why the classification as eastern Bulgarian. Hendricks observes the same feature and agrees that this is the most prominent characteristic of the dialect, but he explains differently its genesis - not replacement of the Ers with Yat but variations connected with hesitant Er without involving the Yat at all. I do not feel up to the task to comment who is right or wrong. One thing is sure: all people involved here (Hendricks, Vidoeski, Miletic, and Conev) know very well the matter they are talking about and all come with valid arguments for or against. Therefore, the best thing to do is not to be so definitive about the classification of this dialect. --Lantonov (talk) 06:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

About Korca dialect, see Афанасий Селищев. Славянское население в Албании. Издание Македонского Научного Института. София, 1931. (in Russian) On pp. 301-330 he lists typical еastern Yat isogloss features: Пояни from Поляни, Заваляни, пояк from поляк, Лимляне, Врбян, etc. True, those are mixed with some western features of Yat: also полени, Плеш. Sometimes Yat is transformed into a instead of я but all this makes the language richer and more interesting, going against the classification canons. Most of the examples are from Boboshtica (near Korca) and the neighboring villages near Kostur. --Lantonov (talk) 07:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

It is very interesting. Yes the vevcani-radozda dialect is very localised covering those two villages and Mali Vlaj (which is nearly deserted). Yes i too found the information on the Boboshtica and Korca dialect, [1] .But unfortunately the examples are given in Albanian script (ë, ç) and not in a transliterated latin form. PMK1 (talk) 10:41, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

From Talk:Bulgarian dialects in case you haven't seen it:

The most characteristic feature of Radojda-Vevcani dialect (Radojda, Vevcani, Mali Vlay and Lin (in Albania) is the substitution of OBg ѫ, ъ with the Yat vowel. After non-labial consonant Yat is pronounced /ʲæ/ (as is its probable pronunciation in OBg): г/ʲæ/жва, гн/ʲæ/с, гр/ʲæ/ди, вн/ʲæ/тре, д/ʲæ/га, й/ʲæ/же (въже), й/ʲæ/дица (въдица), к/ʲæ/тник, р/ʲæ/ка, ск/ʲæ/по, д/ʲæ/п, з/ʲæ/би, с/ʲæ/бота; с/ʲæ/нце (слънце), г/ʲæ/лтат; г/ʲæ/рне, к/ʲæ/рф, з/ʲæ/рно, с/ʲæ/рп, с/ʲæ/рце, т/ʲæ/рн etc. After labial consonant Yat is pronounced /ɶ/: м/ɶ/ш, п/ɶ/т, л/ɶ/ка, д/ɶ/п, з/ɶ/би, пр/ɶ/т, б/ɶ/рго, п/ɶ/рво, в/ɶ/рба, м/ɶ/ртоф, в/ɶ/лк, п/ɶ/лно, в/ɶ/лна, м/ɶ/лчит, ж/ɶ/лчка, г/ɶ/лтат etc. This feature is the same as in the Eastern Bulgarian dialects in Teteven and Pomorie regions. --Lantonov (talk) 10:41, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Your info and my info on the area of the dialect is the same: 3 villages in Republic of Macedonia (Radozda, Vevcani and Mali Vlaj) and 1 village in Albania (Lin). This is from Stoykov. Bulgarian dalectology. There are some more features on R-V in Stoykov, 5 in all:

2. Diphtongs шт, жд < *tj, *dj: гàшти, лèшта, прàшта, вèжди, сàжди.

3. Action participles of the type: носèешти, игрèешти.

4. Future tense forming particle ќа (instead of ќe, etc.)

5. Omission of suffix -м for verb conjugation for 1 person singular present tense and for 3rd conjugation verbs: ѝма, вѝка, and also for the other conjugations — бèра, сèча, нòса, йàда.

As a general principle in dialectology, one must investigate the oldest possible carriers: the oldest people in the village, the oldest writings in the dialect (if one is lucky to find such).

Thanks for the information. I missed the conversation on the Bulgarian dialects page.

Point 1 is significant in dialectology, but i think that this feature is bieng used less and less in the villages. The switch to the Struga dialect would be the most prominent. It is interesting though words such as б/ɶ/рго are now just брго and п/ɶ/рво is just прво, whether this has to do with politics or simpler linguistics i do not know. :).

Point 2. Is 100% true, from personal experience i even picked this up in some of my speech. lol, eg Gakji => Gaштi.

point 3. Is also very true of the dialect.

point 4. as for the ќe → ќа switch. че is equally as common. ќа, ќe, че are all used. but the ќ → шт switch eg. штe never occurs.

point 5. this is true. also to note the addition of a t at the end of the he/she/it verb. eg. toj čita → toj čitat.

It is an interesting dialect surrounded by Macedonian, Albanian and Aromanian speakers. Although i have tried to talk to many old people while is was in Radozda and Mali Vlaj i was unable to hear a strong presence of your first point. none the less it is a linguistic feature of the dialect. PMK1 (talk) 09:52, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Nice observations, PMK1. It seems that point 1 has been significant in the past but not now. Older dialectology makes much fuss on this point, and even list it as a single feature characterising the dialect. In Stoykov, Radozda-Vevcani is given as a variety of Struga dialect so your suggestion is true to the point, too. For point 4, it is my fault. Stoykov says only: "4. Future tense forming particle ќа" without the text in the parentheses. It is one dialect: Ohrid-Struga dialect with three subdialects - "Ohrid town dialect", "Struga dialect", and "Radozda-Vevcani dialect". Point 5 - your addition "toj čitat" is very interesting and not found in Stoykov. Vaguely remember to have found it in some other dialect, too, but have to look to see which. --Lantonov (talk) 10:21, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that stoykovs observations are the best, much of his information is questionable at least. Many linguist also disagree with his linguistic classification. but politics aside. where has he got his sources for this study of the Ohrid region, form texts or from actual field work?. Also Macedonian linguists tend to classify the Radozda-Vevcani as seperate dialects from the Ohrid and Struga Dialects. The ohrid gradski dialect is not much different from the actual dialect of the villages surrounding ohrid. It is more posh, if you know what i mean. The whole gradski/selski govor thing. PMK1 (talk) 06:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

I strongly disagree that the information in Stoykov is questionable. On the contrary, he avoids controversial issues and includes only consensus information. He has done much field work in his time in the whole Bulgarian dialect region. He has not been physically only in Aegean Macedonia and Thrace but has studies on refugees from there which count as field work. For Ohrid-Struga group, the older literature is mostly from Bulgarian authors while the newer is from Macedono-Bulgarian (e.g., Vidoeski - the best linguist from RM) and foreign (BTW I am not sure if Hendricks is foreign - he know so well the language and the dialect). He also lists Radozda-Vevcani as separate from Struga and Ohrid but unites them in one dialect group, similarly to Drama-Ser and Solun, which are in the group West Rup. It would be better to put here the original Stoykov text about these dialects, which I do below:

ОХРИДСКО-СТРУЖКИ ГОВОР

Разположен е в котловините около Охридското езеро. На югоизток граничи с преспанския, на север — с дебърския, на запад опира до Албания, на изток — с битолския говор. Общи черти свързват говорите в очертания регион в една цялост.

1. Установено третосрично ударение.
2. Контракция на две съседни гласни в една дълга гласна: снā < снàа, змӣ < змѝи, глā < глàа (глава).
3. Протетично й: йъ̀же (въже), йъ̀глен (въглен), йъ̀ток (вътък).
4. Съчетание чер-: чèрен, черèша, чèрево.
5. Наличие на агломеративна форма при лични и роднински имена от м. р.: Го вѝде Стойàна.
6. Окончание -ови (-ои) за мн. ч. при едносрични съществителни от м. р.: лèбови (лèбои), рѝдови (рѝдои).
7. Троен член: лèбот, лèбов, лèбон.
8. Тройно показателно местоимение: овой, оной, той.
9. Окончание -т за 3 л. ед. ч. сег. вр.: нòсит, ѝмат.
10. Суфикс -в- при глаголи от типа: кỳпвит (купува), кàжвит (казва).
11. Конструкции на ѝма и сум с минало страдателно причастие: ѝмам пѝсано, сум дòйден.

В този регион се обособяват по-ограничени диалектни формации:

Г р а д с к и о х р и д с к и г о в о р

1. Гласна ъ на мястото на стб. ѫ: гъ̀ба, гнъс, дъп, зъ̀би, йъ̀же (въже), крък, къ̀клица и др. Гласна ъ е с разширена дистрибуция и се явява в резултат на смесване на носовите гласни (йъ̀зик, йъ̀чмен, йъ̀търва) и в съседство с назален консонант: мъ̀шчеа (мащеха), снъ̀га (снага).
2. Съчетание ол вм. съчетание ъл, лъ: бòлфа (бълха), вòлна, сòлѕа, жолт и др.
3. Съчетания шч, жџ на мястото на *tj, *dj: гàшчи, лèшча, плèшчи, снòшчи, прежџа, сàжџи, вѝжџат.
4. Третолично местоимение той, то.
5. Окончания -ф, -фме, -фте за минало свършено и минало несвършено време: нòсеф, нòсефме, нòсефте, рèкоф, рèкофме, рèкофте; пѝф, пѝфме, пѝфте.

В и д о е с к и, Б. Охридско-струшките говори. Обид за класификациjа.— Прилози МАНУ. Одделение за лингвистика и литературна наука (Скопjе), 7, 1982, № 2, 5—10;

М и р ч е в, К. Най-характернитс особености в охридския говор. — Охрид, 8 дек. 1943, с. 5;

С и л я н о в, Н. Редукция на звука a в охридския и тетовския говор. — СбНУ, 9, 1894, 582—585;

С п р о с т р а н о в, Е. По говора на град Охрид. — СбНУ, 18, 1901, 534—544;

Я к и м о в а, М. Охридският говор. — Изв. на Семинара по слав. филология, 3, 1911, 223—256.

С т р у ж к и г о в о р

Обхваща града Струга и околните села: Вранища, Октиси, Вишни, Лабунища, Подгорци, Боровец (западно от р. Дрин) и Присовяни, Глобочица, Брчево, Боговица, Ташморунища, Ложани (източно от р. Дрин).

1. Гласна ъ на мястото на стб. ѫ: зъ̀би, йъ̀глен (въглен), път, ръ̀ка, скъп, пръ̀чка и др.
2. Съчетание ъл: вълк, въ̀лна, гъ̀лтат, дъ̀лгъ, жълт, пъ̀лно.
3. Съчетания оа, ое ( < ова, ове) се трансформират в съчетания ва, ве: квач (ковач) ← кòач ← кòвач; твàрено (товарено) ← тоàрено ← товàрено; бỳква (букова); чвек (човек) ← чоèк ← чòвек; йàзвец, тъ̀ргвец (търговец) и др.
4. Съчетания шт, жд (и шч, жџ): гàшти—гàшчи, сфèшта—сфèшча, вèжòа—вèжџа, сàжди—сàжџи.
5. Вмъкване на съгласна т, д в съчетания ср, зр: стрèда, стрàмота, стрèбро, здрел, здрак.
6. Глаголно окончание -м е присъщо само на глаголите от III спрежение: ѝмам, тèрам, но бèра, кòл’а, чỳйа, нòса, сèча.
7. Бъдеще време се образува с частиците ке и че.
8. Третолично местоимение: той, тòйа, то, тèйа.
9. Предлог на се употребява и в конструкции за означаване на пряко допълнение при одушевени: Го фàти на Кузèта за ръ̀ка. Го вѝкна на мòмчета.
10. Предлог од има посесивно значение: Му рèче на брàт му от Стойàна. Се жèнит от Пèтрета мнук.

Т о ш е в, К. Диjалектолошки материjали од Струга од XIX век. — Мак. jaзик, 1960— 1961, № 11—12, 1—11;

Т о ш е в, К. Струшкиот говор. (Според некои материjали од ХIХ век.) Скопjе, 1979, 115 с.

Г о в о р ъ т н а Р а д о ж д а и В е в ч а н и

Разпространен е в стружките села Радожда, Вевчани, Мали Влай и намиращото се на албанска територия село Лин.

1. Най-характерна черта на говора е наличието на гласна ê и а̊ в коренна сричка, под ударение на мястото на стб. ѫ , ъ и на съчетания лъ, ръ. Гласна ê не се среща след лабиална съгласна: гềжва, гнêс, грềди, внềтре, дềга, йềже (въже), йềдица (въдица), кềтник, рềка, скềпо, дêп, зềби, сềбота; сềнце (слънце), гềлтат; гềрне, кêрф, зềрно, сêрп, сềрце, тêрн и др. Гласна а̊ cе среща предимно след лабиална (по-рядко след нелабиална) съгласна: ма̊ш, па̊т, ла̊ка, да̊п, за̊би, пра̊т, ба̊рго, па̊рво, ва̊рба, ма̊ртоф, ва̊лк, па̊лно, ва̊лна, ма̊лчит, жа̊лчка, га̊лтат и др. Тази черта напомня състоянието в далечните говори в Тетевенско и Поморийско.
2. Съчетания шт, жд < *tj, *dj: гàшти, лèшта, прàшта, вèжди, сàжди.
3. Деепричастия от типа: носèешти, игрèешти.
4. Частица за бъдеще време к’а.
5. Липса на глаголно окончание -м за 1 л. ед. ч. cer. вр. и при глаголи от III спрежение: ѝма, вѝка, както и при останалите спрежения — бèра, сèча, нòса, йàда.

М и л е т и ч, Л. Важна фонетична особеност на един западномакедонски говор. — СпБАН, 16, 1918, № 9, 35—42;

H e n d r i k s, P. The Radožda-Vevčani Dialect of Macedonian. Cisse, 1976, 303 p.

Of course, Stoykov should not be a dogma but he is the best we have. Pay attention to the feature that you pointed to above: Окончание -т за 3 л. ед. ч. сег. вр.: нòсит, ѝмат. It is common for all 3 (sub)dialects, including Radozda-Vevcani. All Bulgarians who have been to Ohrid, even non-linguists, people from all professions observe that the language spoken there is very close to standard Bulgarian. Reasons are historical, I don't know exactly which. Maybe presence of Ohrid school of Climent in 9th century has a role. --Lantonov (talk) 07:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh i am not discrediting stoykov. I am just saying that some of his information does not reflect the actual situation of the dialects today. I guess that would be due to his reliance on older bulgarian sources, which is obviusly not directly his fault. Features such as Троен член: лèбот, лèбов, лèбон., Окончание -т за 3 л. ед. ч. сег. вр.: нòсит, ѝмат., # Окончание -ови (-ои) за мн. ч. при едносрични съществителни от м. р.: лèбови (лèбои), рѝдови (рѝдои).. Dont actually count as defining features of the dialects as they are used in ma ny dialects across eastern macedonia. The whole -ovi/-oj switch would definately be a gradski/selski swtich, regardless of the dialects. Also the whole овой, оной, той, thing is innacurate as an й is not used, but rather a regular и or a ј, depending on pronounciation. This is a subtle pro-bulgarian transliteration, as sounds like й, are not used in this area of macedonia, hence the lack of need for that letter in the alphabet.

Also other features of the struga dialect which seem unreliable is this Предлог на се употребява и в конструкции за означаване на пряко допълнение при одушевени: Го фàти на Кузèта за ръ̀ка. Го вѝкна на мòмчета. The use of ръ̀ка should be changed to the raka. Other features that are now redundant are мнук, in which внук is now used. The used of шт, жд is already a redundant feature, while (шч, жџ) would also be used very rarely now: eg. гаќи-гàшти—гàшчи. Another lost feature is Гласна ъ на мястото на стб. ѫ: зъ̀би, йъ̀глен (въглен), път, ръ̀ка, скъп, пръ̀чка и др.. His books are very informative but a bit outdated with subtle connections to the bulgarian language. I wouldnt go as far as calling it propaganda but pro-bulgarian would be more appropriate. The whole Ohrid govor may be closer to bulgarian due to the pr-bulgarian sentiment in the city last century. This is still evident among the very old people in the old city of ohrid, but if you ask what nationality and what language they speak; it is macedonian. Figure that one out? lol. I wouldnt go back to the 9th century for dialectial features, way too irrelevant and outdated. But generally very interesting dialects. PMK1 (talk) 06:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

The general rule in dialectology (not just Bulgarian dialectology, any dialectology) is that you take the oldest available source (person, document, etc.) and from this you derive the information on the dialect, because this is the closest to the origin of the dialect, the original dialect of the place. Later changes in the dialect are influence of other dialects or official standard and obscure the original dialect. For Bulgarian dialects inside Bulgaria the same principle is applied. A feature that is lost in recent time is not just deleted. If one does it, it is bad science. All these features that you mentioned as "not defining" are actually the defining features because they are what make the dialect different from the standard language, and here we are talking about Standard Bulgarian because Stoykov's book is "Bulgarian dialectology" not "Macedonian dialectology". For instance, today in Bulgaria we also say "внук" but "мнук" is a word characteristic for the dialect because it is not found in other dialects or found only in few. Reference to old sources (not just Bulgarian) is not a fault but an advantage in the particular case with dialects. Stoykov, Selshchev, Mladenov, Miletich, and others did not have to push any view: neither "pro-Bulgarian" nor "pro-Macedonian". They wrote about the dialect, such as it is and this made a good and sound dialectology. The same can be said about Bozhidar Vidoeski and Kosta Peev from RM, and Hendricks from USA. The fact that the last three considered these to be dialects of "Macedonian language" did not prevent them to be true to the facts and their works to constitute a sound dialectology and linguistics. These authors will be cited in the articles about dialects because the info contained in their works contributes to understanding of the dialect irrespective of what they call it. The dialects that are spoken in the region are much earlier than 1945 when "Macedonian language" was stipulated. Triple definite article characterises some dialects in RM and Bulgaria but not all dialects in the two countries. In Rhodopes we have, e.g. лèбот, лèбос, лèбон, while Breznik, Tran, is лèбот, лèбов, лèбон. й is used everywhere in the Macedonian Bulgarian dialects but in 1945 it was replaced by j in RM to be close to Serbian. The Ohrid govor is not due to the "pro-Bulgarian" sentiment; it is due to the Bulgarian nationality and conscience of the fathers and grandfathers of the people who will say that they speak "Macedonian" now if I ask them. They will say "Macedonian" because this is what they are taught in school. The purpose of dialectology is to show the richness of the language, not its conformity with some dialect / group of dialects chosen as "standard". It will be really good if one can trace dialects to 9th century, but it is very rarely possible. Dialects in the Bulgarian-speaking area (regions of Moesia, Trace and Macedonia) can be traced to 15th century at the earliest. A dialect is a dialect, and it is never outdated, even if it is not spoken today. In such case it becomes a dialect spoken in the past. Koneski, Friedman, and similar "linguists" paid to tailor the language according to the official political line (Serbo-Macedonian) in RM have nothing to do with the Bulgarian dialectology. The dialects are interesting not least because they show the richness of Bulgarian language in a period when Greeks and Turks insisted on these people to speak Greek and Turkish languages. They were true patriots and with the cost of their lives preserved the Bulgarian language spoken by their forefathers. I wouldn't say that dialects preserved with such sacrifices have "subtle" connections with the mother language. --Lantonov (talk) 08:50, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you, but the last bit is a bit off topic (no offence). The linguists should be congratulated on their hard work. I am not saying that the old dialects were not actually dialects, i am merely saying as in all dialects, words change, vowels changes, tenses change, emphasis' change etc. It is an interesting dialect, i have just merely explained to you the 'situation on the ground' in the territory where this dialect is spoken. good job. PMK1 (talk) 10:05, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Korca

About Korca dialect, Stoykov has in mind primarily Boboshtica and Drenovyane. Selishchev includes to these two also the village of Lobanice to the east and some other (not mentioned) villages to the west of Kostur. It seems that the area of this dialect stretches between Korca and Kostur. From what I read, Yat in the form of я /ja/ and sometimes /a/ is widely used in this dialect: бял, вяра, лято, няшчо, ряка, двя, видяйте, двясте, имяше; грянда, зянт, яндро, пянда, рянт (the last 5 examples with the ancient nasal vowels). Also: яс, жяба, жялба, жяр, свяшча, лябо, тия, тязи. These are from Stoykov. Selishchev gives many more я words but his text is very unsystematic. He groups together examples with several features together so it is hard to understand what he is trying to show. From what I gather, most of the words are with /ja/ or /a/ for Yat, although some have /e/ for Yat (the latter is a western feature). The examples of sentences leave the impression of typical eastern very archaic dialect: Помина прет порти царотому. Царо го чу и му арекса много. Детято токо шчо отиде у царатого. As you see, case is fully preserved. So this is not even Middle Bulgarian but older than that. --Lantonov (talk) 13:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is very interesting for this feature to be preserved in such a manner. Words such as бял are now бeл, ряка = рeка. etc. Yes it is a very old dialect. Macedonian dialectologists usually put forward that in Korca the e become a /iæ/ under stress. This is another source [2] or Victor Friedman criticising Stoykovs lack of focus on syntax and semantics. Just a question can you understand the phrases: Oh kume! tuva si bill? Shço s'iskri, Ot gje znjë toj koj e kashjëjo tvoj?, Am ka ne znjëll?, Toj znjë shço çini Gospo a ne poznava kasheiti

togovi. or is the translation necessary for this dialect of bulgarian? PMK1 (talk) 07:00, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Friedman instead of criticising everything Bulgarian, which he does all the time, would do better to write a dialectology of "Macedonian language" and let's compare him with Stoykov. As is for now, Stoykov simply has no alternative. Friedman's classification can be criticised in its turn that it introduces an isogloss which is not typical for Macedonian dialects and is taken from Serbian, and this isogloss is very new (1950s), not like the old and established isoglosses from which one judges about dialects. This erroneous method for dialect classification is very characteristic for Konjevski and Friedman and is dictated by politics. As you see, Stoykov lists this feature in Ohrid-Struga (# 11) in Bulgarian dialects but does not put it as an isogloss in the Bulgarian dialect atlas exactly because it is very new and uncharacteristic for the larger region. About the phrases listed - here is my attempt of translation: Oh my best man! here you were? Why did you hide. From where does he know which is your piece? How doesn't he know? He knows what God is doing, but he doesn't know his own pieces (of bread). This dialect is much similar to standard Bulgarian than many of the dialects inside present Bulgaria. For this dialect, I am not sure about some words (s'iskri, kashjëjo) while in many of the other Bulgarian dialects, I cannot understand anything. Try to distance yourself from Friedman and Konjevski, and tell me objectively which is greater: distance of this dialect from Macedonian standard, or distance from Bulgarian standard. Standard Bulgarian: Ох куме! тука си бил. Защо (Що) сe скри? Откъде (отгде) знае той кой е твоя къшей? Ами как да не знае? Той знае що чини Господ а не познава своите къшеи. шчо, гье, ка are very typical for eastern dialects of Thrace and Rhodopes.

In Korca the e become a /iæ/ under stress usually but not always: тѝя, ѝмяше (the stress is on и in those).--Lantonov (talk) 09:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I just looked in the map around Korca in Google Earth. North of Korca we have villages of Pojan and Urman-Pojan for which Selishchev writes that come from Поляна (eastern Yat diagnostic word) - it becomes полена west of the Yat border. There are also several Slavic-sounding names around Boboshticё (Бобощица), e.g. Kamenicё (Каменица), Drjanovё (Дряново), Mborje (Боря according to Selishchev), Hoҫisht (Hoҫishti) - Хочище, Bilisht, Bilishti (Билище), Kapshticё (Капщица, Капeщица). To the north: Zvezdё (Звезда), Podgorie (Подгорие), Sovjan (Совяне), Zvirinё (Зверина), Libonik (Любоник acc. to Selishchev). On bigger zoom I see very small villages: Rёmbec (Рямбец which is Рябец with nasal Yat), Rov - no comment, Zёmblak (Жя(м)блак acc. to Selishchev, again the nasal Yat), Bulgarec (Булгарец, Българец), Neviҫisht (Невичище), Dishnicё (Дишница), Damjanec (Дамянец), Porodinё (Породина), Ҫёrravё (Чернава according to Selishchev). We have however also the western variant Polenё (Полена instead of Поляна). Also Dunicё (Дуница), Malina (Малина), Udenisht (Воденище, very interesting, remember the reduction of vowels in Kukush-Voden); the last one is on the Albanian side of Ochrid Lake, peak Mal Kamje (Mali i Kamjes)- Мали Камjен. This is a large region in Albania and I am not sure if it is a single dialect or several Slavic dialects. Looks like more than one. All this corroborates what Selishchev writes about this dialect (dialects). I couldn't see a single Slavic name around Kostur (Castoria) because the Greeks have replaced all Slavic names on their territory with Greek ones. --Lantonov (talk) 14:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

well you have the Upper Prespa dialect spoken in the Mala prespa area. And the Korca dialect, along with the Golo Brdo dialect further north. There are about 75 villages in albania and kosovo speaking the Macedonian language (or bulgarian if you like?!).PMK1 (talk) 21:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Summarizing

Korča Dialect: Ох куме!, тува си бил. Шчо с'искри?. От гје знја тој кој е кашјејо твој. Ам ка не знjал? Тој знjа шчо чини Госпо а не познава кашејти тогови. - (i have used а instead of ъ, for the translit.)

Struga Dialect: Ох куме! тука си бил. Шчо (зошто) се скри? От кај знајт тој кој е кашјето/парчето твој. Ам/а како не знал? Тој знај/ит шчо чини/прајт Господ а не познава кашети/парчињата своји.

Literary Macedonian: Ох куме! тука си бил. Зошто (Што) сe кри? Од каде (Од кај) знај тој кој е парчето твој. Ама како да не знае? Тој знај што прави (чини) Господ а не познава парчињата своји.

Literary Bulgarian: Ох куме! тука си бил. Защо (Що) сe скри? Откъде (отгде) знае той кой е твоя къшей? Ама как да не знае? Той знае що чини Господ а не познава своите къшеи

Latinic script:

Korča dialect: Oh kume! tuva si bill. Ščo s'iskri? Ot gje znjă toj koj e kašjăjo tvoj? Am ka ne znjăll? Toj znjă ščo čini Gospo a ne poznava kašeiti togovi

Struga dialect: Oh kume! tuka si bil. Ščo (zošto) si skri? Ot kaj znaj/it toj koj e kašjeto/parčeto tvoj. Am/a kako ne znal? Toj znaj/it ščo čini/prajt Gospod a ne poznava kašeti/parčinjata svoji

Literary Macedonian: Oh Kume! tuka si bil. Zošto (Što) se kri? Od kade (Od kaj) znae toj, koj e parčeto tvoj. Ama kako da ne znae? Toj znaj što pravi (čini) Gospod a ne poznava parčinjata svoji.

Literary Bulgarian: Okh kume! tuka si bil. Zašto (što) se skri? Otkăde (otgde) znae toi koi e tvoya kăšei? Ama kak da ne znae? Toi znae što čini Gospod a ne poznava svoite kăšei

English: Oh my best man! here you were? Why did you hide. From where does he know which is your piece? How doesn't he know? He knows what God is doing, but he doesn't know his own pieces (of bread)

Nice and true comparison. --Lantonov (talk) 07:07, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Giorgos

Unfortunately, have to leave now but I will be back with any suggestion that comes to mind. Don't hesitate to undo any of my cuts if you find them excessive. Happy editing!

kukush-voden dialect

If you are interested here is a good source of the dialect spoken in the kukush-voden regions (lower vardar dialect) in 1852. http://mk.wikibooks.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE_%D0%95%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B5. PMK1 (talk) 12:49, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the source. b:mk:Кониково Евангелие. It is very nice find. Konikovo gospel is a well-known late damaskin written in the Voden dialect of Bulgarian language (ΜΠΟΓΑΡΣΚΟΙΓΕΖΙΚ) with Greek letters. Is there any more info on the source - like where and when found, etc. If not, I can add info, including the cover, picture of which is uploaded in wiki [3]. Do you understand the language in it? For myself, I understand about 80%.--Lantonov (talk) 09:21, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Here is some more info about this document - акад. Йордан Иванов, 1934 г. Българите в Солунско. Исторически бележки. "През средата на XIX в. между по-просветените българи на солунската българска колония се издават братята Дингови, родом от изгореното още преди един век воденско село Държилово. Киряк Дингов имал в Солун печатница. Братовата му пък дъщеря Славка отворила първото българско училище в Солун в 1865 г. В Динговата печатница излязло неделно евангелие по долновардарски български говор, в тъй наречената Вардарйя. Евангелието е печатано с гръцки букви. Преводачът му бил отец Павел, родом от с. Кониково, 10 километра западно от Вардар. Гръцките духовни власти, признавайки българщината на населението в тая непосредна солунска област, са търпели употребата на българско евангелие сред своето паство. Ето заглавният лист на това евангелие, който предаваме с български букви: „Евангелие на господа бога и спаса нашего Исуса Христо, сига ново типосано на болгарско йезик, за секоа неделя от година до година со ред. Преписано и диортосано ( = изправено) от мене Павел йеромонах, божигропски протосингел, родом Воденска епархия от село Кониково. Солон, щампа Кирякова Държилен 1852.” В областта Вардарйя, чиито български южни села допират до самия беломорски бряг в Солунския залчв, се ширели и други български преводи на неделното евангелие, останали непечатани, но употребявани в църковна служба. Един от тия ръкописи, написан от Евстатия Киприади през 1863 г. в с. Колакия, се намира в наши ръце. Заглавният лист, предаден с български букви, гласи: „Господиново, и сфетаго евангелио, на Бога нашего големата цръкфа християнофъ, искарено на бугарцко изикъ тувашно зборъ на Вардарйя, за уфъ неделите съти, за гудината и за съти празниците големите, за цела година за литургията. Са писало утъ Евстатию Киприади уфъ селото Колакия на 30 ноемврио месицъ 1863.” Втори подобен ръкопис, писан от същата ръка, бил намерен от френските войски в Солунско през време на Световната война. Той ще бъде обнародван от френските слависти Мазон и Вайан." --Lantonov (talk) 15:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Good thing that you removed it. you should not provide an explanation, nor am i looking for one. I believe that bulgarian is in fact bulgarian!. PMK1 (talk) 05:20, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Recently, I read a book by Georgi Radulov: Who falsifies history (in Bulgarian), and it started me rethinking many things. --Lantonov (talk) 06:03, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Can i understand it, yes. It is a strange dialect with heavily accented vowel. The fact that the actual number of speakers is very low, is very disheartening. It is irrelevant as to whether the dialect is actually macedonian or Bulgarian. But this is a good example of an old Aegean dialect. The language no doubt would have changed since then on account of out side influences, hellenisation and the modernisation of the dialect. A comparison of the dialect today with the 150 year old text would be very interesting. All of the dialects spoken in Macedonia have changed some way or another in the last 150 years. A good source and lets leave it at that. Also would you have any knowledge regarding the Aromanians of the Aromanian language? PMK1 (talk) 03:06, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Prof. Kosta Peev from Strumica has a very good 2-volume study on the Kukush dialect. He researched on refugees from Kukush after the Balkan wars. He gives many examples from more modern time (well, mostly 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's) in which this dialect is somewhat influenced by the changed location of the people. I have not been specially interested in Aromanians (those in Macedonia, I suppose). What I know as literature is the old study of Prof. Weigand from Leipzig "Ethnography of Macedonia", in which he compares Aromanian, Albanian (Illyrian), and Greek languages and finds some similarities. The study of Vangelis on Macedonia (older still), gives a primary importance on Aromanians in Macedonia, and describes them and their language in detail, according to the Greek POV. --Lantonov (talk) 05:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Where did these refugees flee to? No doubt that would have great importance, if it were gevgelija/dojran the loss of dialect would be at the minimum. But if it were tetovo, sofia, skopje, kyustendil then there would be a big difference. It is interesting that he found similarities, i will keep a lookout for the texts. PMK1 (talk) 00:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

They were primarily around Strumica, Kumanovo, Kavadarci. During the Second Balkan War, Grecomans evacuated Strumica and burned their quarter so that it appears that the town has been burnt by the Bulgarian Army. The refugees from Strumica, called "Greeks" but in fact Grecomans settled in Kukush whose Slavic population had been captured, gathered and expelled by the Greek Army and andartes. The refugees from Kukush settled in many places, including Sofia and Skopje but most of them went to the evacuated Strumica and the towns in its vicinity. A little more about Peev: Пеев, Коста. Кукушкиот говор. Кн. I, 1987, 351 с.; кн. II, 1988, 363 с. See also bg:Коста Пеев, mk:Коста Пеев.--Lantonov (talk) 06:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

yes, i am familiar with the story of the burning of kukuš. It is also very interesting the story of the Grecomans from Strumica, but hey anything is possible. of all the dialects in Macedonian the strumica dialect is the most well known (not by speakers but by name, eg. Strumički Govor, which most macedonians consider not macedonian, not bulgarian, not serbian but a cross-breed of them all!). Even if the refugees had moved here they would have lost some of their dialect, but would have significantly altered the original strumica dialect. I will have a look at it, maybe you would like to start the article? PMK1 (talk) 06:10, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I was not in Strumica and Kukush in 1913 to have it first hand. What I wrote above is in some detail (witnesses, etc.) in the Report of the Carnegie Commission. --Lantonov (talk) 07:25, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I dont mean the burning of either strumica or kukus, i mean this article? Seeing as you have much knowledge about the subject.PMK1 (talk) 21:23, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I have nothing against starting it myself but in the moment I have serious personal problems and all my energy goes in there. Your knowledge about these dialects is at least as much as mine and possibly greater so if you feel like it, start the page. When (if) I sort my problems, I can contribute what I can. I won't edit-war on Bulgarian vs. Macedonian issues. I think we agree that this is political and not linguistic problem. --Lantonov (talk) 06:45, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Hear Hear PMK1 (talk) 04:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

riza

i was reading that in the shopski dialects that the words "riza" may be used instead of "košula". This is very strange because in the Struga region, riza is another words for "krpa" (towel). Do you know of any similarities? PMK1 (talk) 09:35, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

"riza" is the standard Bulgarian word for shirt. In Shopsko (Sofia region) and Graovo, the dialect word is "koshulja". Many people from Shopsko (including myself), use the standard Bulgarian word "riza" for "shirt", because "koshulja" is very dialect word, and people will be regarded as peasants if they use "koshulja" in public. However, my grandparents (from Graovo), used only "koshulja" and they were not ashamed of being peasants. "Koshulja" is used for shirt also in some East Bulgarian dialects (e.g. in Middle and Western Rhodopes). Standard Bulgarian word for "towel" is "кърпа", in Graovo (Shopsko) -- "кръпа" or "кръпé" (the last one is neutral gender).

Triphtongization is characteristic for Serbian language, and Bulgarian dialects pick it up along with many other Serbian traits the further west we go. For instance, in Трънско (Western Graovo and Znepole), it is already "крпа" and "крпе". --Lantonov (talk) 06:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok, that is interesting. Thanks. PMK1 (talk) 10:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

FK506

Thanks, good piece of information! --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 18:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Бобощица / Бобишча

Greetings! In your article on the Solun Dialect, you state that the Kostur dialect was the first Bulgarian dialect to be described by V. Grigirovich. As a native speaker of the Kostur dialect, I have to point out that Grigorovich was referring to the village of Boboshtitsa south of Korcha, and not to Bobishcha in the Kostur region. Keep up the great work on the dialects. Do Kostur next. You have a native speaker you can check with. Kostolata (talk) 20:58, 28 January 2009 (UTC)Kostolata

Thanks for answering. I hope I didn't come across as too pushy in my messages to you. For whatever it's worth, most Kosturcheni and their descendants in North America consider their dialect Bulgarian "Болгáрцки". Kostolata (talk) 15:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I read Russian and Bulgarian fairly well. The "nosovki" are alive and well in my dialect, before voiced stops: зъмби, грънди, чендо, пендесе, чембрица I have Blagoi Shklifov's studies on the Kostur and Dolna Prespa dialects. But what I don't have is your vast linguistic talents. So keep up the great work!Kostolata (talk) 15:38, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Bulgarian Dialects - Glagolic vs Glagolitic

In your article "Bulgarian Dialects" you use the adjective "glagolic". Isn't the correct form "glagolitic"? Since you are writing about the development of *tj/dj, you may be interested to know that k'/g' are very rare in the Kostur region. For example, in Dambeni and Smardesh, we have "ke" for the future particle. Everything else is шч/ж: къшча, шчерка, свешча, межа, вежа. Kostolata (talk) 14:41, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I'll check around for the correct form Glagolic/Glagolitic. About Kostur dialect, I was adding the very same things maybe 2 min before you wrote this here. Check it out for eventual mistakes or additions. --Lantonov (talk) 14:46, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Glagolitic alphabet seems to be found more often. Glagolic alphabet is also found occasionally (redirected). --Lantonov (talk) 16:03, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Great stuff! Kostolata (talk) 16:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Greetings! Your knowledge of Bulgarian dialects is truly prodigious and I find this article a fascinating read. If it is of any interest to you, "шт/жд" also occur in certain pockets in southwestern Aegean Macedonia. They are found in the southeastern Lerin Dialect along the axis Banitsa-Pətele-Ekshi Su-Zeleniche-Prekopana. They are also found in Dolna Prespa. I have grown up listening to all these dialects. If you want a footnote for Dolna Prespa, I can look it up for you. Cheers! Kostolata (talk) 18:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

шт/ жд in southwestern Macedonia

Greetings! Your knowledge of Bulgarian dialects is truly prodigious and I find this article a fascinating read. If it is of any interest to you, "шт/жд" also occur in certain pockets in southwestern Aegean Macedonia. They are found in the southeastern Lerin Dialect along the axis Banitsa-Pətele-Ekshi Su-Zeleniche-Prekopana. They are also found in Dolna Prespa. I have grown up listening to all these dialects. If you want a footnote for Dolna Prespa, I can look it up for you. Cheers! Kostolata (talk) 18:28, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Equation numbering barnstar

Thanks for my very first barnstar you gave. Although it is a long article, I didn't spend too much time to reshape those numbers. Compare to you work, my work is trivial :-) - Justin545 (talk) 02:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

U.S. Constitution and ethnic political parties

I noticed on Talk:Roma in Bulgaria that you had asked a while back whether the U.S. Constitution allows for ethnic parties. It was indeed an interesting question, and I don't know if anyone ever answered it for you. Since the U.S. Constitution was written before the political party system existed in the U.S. (1787), it doesn't even address the concept of political parties. What becomes a question of mine is whether ethnic parties have existed U.S. and run candidates in elections. I suppose ethnic lobby groups in the U.S. substitute for them.

This is a reasonable comparison. --Lantonov (talk) 11:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Peter Daicos

Hi Lantonov, I address to you since you are one of the current Wikipedia majors and also because you are the one who welcomed me to this task.-

Among many articles, I was trying to keep Peter Daicos, the AFL former footballer's one as neat and neutral as possible.- As you may see in the "History" and "Discussions", I have been involved in.- At fist, i have to assume in a sort of "nationalistic" hot headed way, but as you may see in the development I have melted into an informative issue, leaving national POV's aside.

This Daicos chap, happens to be an Australian, hailing from the Macedonia region. Being myself from a Greek extraction, people from Macedonia are either Greeks or Bulgarians for me.- But since the "Macedonian" nation was created I gave up to international consensus.

With this player in particular, it happens that both "Macedonian Slavs"(namely "Aegean") and "Macedonian" Greeks (namely "Slavophones"), claim his belonging.

I tryied to write a neutral article with proper redirections (even against the proper Greek fanatics), where I considered that the "Ethnicity issue" would be useful.

Since the last months I have been chequed by another used (Mactruth) who happens to be a chauvinist, I do not want to end in an Editing War. I think that what he looks for is just political propaganda and/or POV.

I therefore please ask you -if you may- to read the article (with the redirections, editings and discussions) and please set order, so as the article itsef is not denaturalized.

Thank you very much.- Periptero (talk) 20:22, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Ancient Heritage of Bulgaria's Territory

Hi Lantonov. I am having a dispute with a few people who feel that the Bulgarian territory's ancient heritage should not be mentioned in the lede. They are also under the impression that it should not be stated that Bulgaria is partly comprised of the regions officially known as Moesia, Thrace and Macedonia, as their argument is that this is too detailed for the lede itself. That however is ironic, as the current lede discusses in far more detail the Stara Planina range, Rodopi range, Rila range, Musala, the Danubian Plain and the Upper Thracian Plain. As you can see, it's not the details that bother them, but rather any information that may somehow be associated with ancient cultures.

I provided numerous examples that the general Wikipedia consensus is that this type of information can be mentioned in the ledes of various modern countries whose territories were once home to ancient civilizations. Some examples are Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Italy, Greece, India, etc... Their argument then became that Bulgaria is not a direct product of the Thracian civilization. I explained that no country today is direct product of an ancient civilization, simply because modern sovereign nation-states did not exist before the Treaty of Westphalia. In other words, it is difficult to quantify the links between antiquity and modernity, although it is undeniable that some traditions that existed in the past are still carried on today. In Bulgaria's example the Kukeri Festival and Martenitsa are a legacy of Thracian rituals. In other words, if this information is to be kept out of the lede, it would mean that it should not be in the ledes of other countries either. That of course made some Greek editors rather defensive.

I listed many other reasons and disproved various hypocritical argumentative points in the talk:Bulgaria discussion page. As a result, their premises shifted repeatedly, always in search of leverage on the matter. Unable to counter my statements effectively, one user has now proclaimed that the article consensus is against me regardless of how objective I may be. The problem it seems is that a few motivated users utilize double standards and dominate edits in the Bulgaria article, while those that may indeed support proper changes and indeed the neutralization of double standards may not even be aware of the discussion. Thus I ask if you may humbly share your opinion. If you have the time, can you please look at the discussion page and share with me your thoughts on the matter. There is a lot of info there and I would appreciate it if you read everything as this would give you a good idea about what has been said. Thank you.--Monshuai (talk) 09:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello

I respect your article on BKL singularity as a model, and I was hoping to restore the content that was maimed on other articles, source it and protect it. Will you provide a list for this content? It is difficult to search through contributions.Likebox (talk) 16:12, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Imperial College Meet-up

If you could please shoot me an email I'll let you know whereabouts we'll be later in the day tomorrow and let you know what number to call if you get lost. Hope that's ok! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 13:47, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Mirror symmetry article

Hello,

I noticed that you're a member of WikiProject Mathematics and that you've expressed interest in mathematical physics. I wanted to let you know that the article on mirror symmetry is currently a featured article candidate.

If you're interested, we'd love to hear your thoughts on this page. Please note that you do not need to be an expert on the subject.

Thanks for your help!

Polytope24 (talk) 16:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Possible removal of AWB access due to inactivity

Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Поздрав

Радвам се, че си се върнал въпреки някои местни администратори. 18:18, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Благодаря за приветливото посрещане. Все още никой не ме е обезпокоил след завръщането може би защото редактирам само физико-математически статии засега. Или пък още не са се върнали от лятна ваканция. Lantonov (talk) 19:29, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

My (temporary) return

Despite being angered by some administrators who kept summarily deleting my referenced contributions with a pure spite and moved by vested interest, I decided to return and complete my unfinished work on BKL singularity and related topics. This move was also stimulated by some general policies of Wikipedia such as its staunch support for open access and resistance to the attempts to commercialise it. However, if I sense even a slightest hint of administrative obstruction, I am leaving immediately again. Lantonov (talk) 08:24, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC) Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.

Have your say!

Hi everyone, just a quick reminder that voting for the WikiProject Military history coordinator election closes soon. You only have a day or so left to have your say about who should make up the coordination team for the next year. If you have already voted, thanks for participating! If you haven't and would like to, vote here before 23:59 UTC on 28 September. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Lantonov. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Nominations now open for "Military historian of the year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" awards

Nominations for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards are open until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2018. Why don't you nominate the editors who you believe have made a real difference to the project in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Voting now open for "Military historian of the year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" awards

Voting for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards is open until 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December 2018. Why don't you vote for the editors who you believe have made a real difference to Wikipedia's coverage of military history in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Zelkova, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dorsal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:48, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Backlog Banzai

In the month of September, Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election half-way mark

G'day everyone, the voting for the XIX Coordinator Tranche is at the halfway mark. The candidates have answered various questions, and you can check them out to see why they are running and decide whether you support them. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Bianchi spaces?

Hi, I saw your contributions on Bianchi classification and was wondering if you could add a few sentences explaining what the Bianchi spaces are in that context? Someone asked about this on the Talk page. Cheers, AxelBoldt (talk) 23:25, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

March Madness 2020

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

Roscoea tibetica

I reduced the material you added to Roscoea tibetica a bit (although I added a cladogram). We shouldn't really be including this material yet, since there's only a primary source which isn't even the final version. However, it's interesting (to me at least!), and I doubt there will be objections. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, you made a considerable improvement to the text. You are right, the material is very fresh (from several days ago) and is not yet discussed by other authors. Lantonov (talk) 19:02, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Exogen. 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) 06:42, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hannonia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stigma.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Red links

Re your recent edit at Brunsvigia, see WP:REDLINKS, in particular the third paragraph of the lead section. In the particular case of your edit, it may be justified, because there's a species list later. Also we don't describe all the individual species in genus articles, so quite a bit of the material will, hopefully, eventually be moved to species articles. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:59, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Absolute space and time, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Scalar and Position.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 31 October 2020 (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) 01:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject Newcomer and Historian of the Year awards now open

G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Voting for "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" closing

G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive

Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nomination period closing soon

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:43, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election voting has commenced

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:39, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting period closing soon

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:32, 26 September 2021 (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) 00:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Survey about History on Wikipedia (If you reside in the United States)

I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. You must be 18 years of age or older, reside in the United States to participate in this study. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, paposto@ncsu.edu Apolo1991 (talk) 15:20, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations opening soon

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting opening soon!

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Correction to previous election announcement

Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I (Hog Farm) didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting closing soon

Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:05, 2 September 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) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Voting for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023 is now open!

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Wikiproject

Hi, I see you're a member of WP:Mythology, would you be interested in a sub project on WP:Anthropology on oral tradition? Kowal2701 (talk) 14:18, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Voting for coordinators is now open!

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Register your vote here by 23:59 UTC on 29 September! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:34, 18 September 2024 (UTC)