Talk:North Macedonia under the Ottoman Empire

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

Map[edit]

The map accompanying the article is somewhat confusing. The borders are (almost) present-day borders, not borders at Ottoman times, and according to the byline, the hatched area forms an entity whereas the article says that there was no Macedonian entity, but three vilayets. Can someone clarify this? --Thathánka Íyotake (talk) 20:51, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality & other issues[edit]

Here are just some of the article's problems:

  • missing a great deal of surrounding history
  • section titles are non-neutral
  • characterizations
  • place names are presented without regard to Wikipedia naming policies
  • The role of Serbian kings is cut to fit the tone of the page. The fact that they are Serbs is misrepresented, or not shown at all.
  • Any Greek element is absent. Magic-wand-style vanished. This is certainly due to the page originally being written as a history of the former Yugoslav & now independent, Republic of Macedonia, in a historical period where that cannot be defined as that. Thus the major confusion!

Shadowmorph ^"^ 06:55, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the basics of the history are included; if you want to add on to it, then go ahead. If you think some of the section titles are non-neutral, then change them. Which place names are presented without regard to Wikipedia naming policies? If it's necessary to add detail regarding the kings, such as that they are Serbs, it can be done. I did originally create the page as 'Ottoman-era Republic of Macedonia' but it was suggested at DYK that I change it to this. Therefore, a Greek element is absent. Add a 'Greek element' if you want or the title could be changed so that the article will only discuss the territory of the Republic of Macedonia under Ottoman rule. But I don't see why it need be merged into Macedonia_(region)#History when that article devotes a paragraph or two to the subject. --Local hero talk 20:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article definitely needs to be overhauled. So far it isn't clear whether it is about the territory covered by the Republic of Macedonia in Ottoman times or about the wider region. Its content says mostly the former, its title and some other additions the latter. First we should agree on what the article intends to be and then we can see about (re)writing it accordingly. Constantine ✍ 08:33, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you. There is a problem of how to understand the topic of this article. Macedonia is disambiguation. It is not clear if the topic of this article is:
1) Macedonia (region) under the Ottoman Empire or
2) Territory of the Republic of Macedonia in Ottoman times.
I think that the title of this article defines its subject, which I think is more close to Macedonia (region) in Ottoman times. The Territory of the Republic of Macedonia in Ottoman times is more narrow subject and can be explained within another separate article, if necessary. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:18, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Except, if we have the former, there is no need for the latter. The Republic of Macedonia comprises the northern portion of Macedonia, so on the one hand we'd have duplication and on the other, an anachronistic imposition of modern borders on a historical period. I don't think that the territory of the ROM can be distinguished in any meaningful way from the wider region during this time: whatever events, people or influences, political, economical, religious, etc were present in what today is the RoM were present in the wider region as well. In other words, the territory of the RoM was not a distinct geopolitical unit at the time. Constantine ✍ 12:17, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you, but since I did not know the opinion of other users I wrote "if necessary". --Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:02, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mixing Macedonia (region) with the Republic of Macedonia[edit]

The article is for the history of the region of Macedonia, but the templates are put in the context of the present Republic of Macedonia. The article should be either for the region, either for the country. Now it's all messed up. --StanProg (talk) 16:28, 3 November 2011 (UTC) My question here is in what context should be the article, so we can make the proper changes. Should it be in the context of the region of Macedonia, or in the context of the Republic of Macedonia? --StanProg (talk) 16:33, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I originally created this article as "Ottoman-era Republic of Macedonia." A suggestion was later made at DYK that it be changed to include the entire region. So, I re-named it but I think it should be moved back unless someone wants to add other stuff that happened in the region outside today's Republic of Macedonia. --Local hero talk 16:39, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The name of the article is not so confusing, as is it's content, although I think "Ottoman-era Republic of Macedonia" is OK. The problem here is that the other articles are in the context of the present day countries. Also I don't see Republic of Macedonia at this category Category:History of the Ottoman Empire by country, where it should be. As I see it, we have 2 variants: to rework the article to be in the context of the republic, or to create another article in the context of the republic (an to leave this to be about the region, without the republic related templates and content). Let me know what you think about this. --StanProg (talk) 16:56, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the best solution is to have this article discuss what happened while today's Republic of Macedonia was part of the Ottoman Empire. Whatever happened at this time in Greek Macedonia and Pirin Macedonia should, if it is not already, be discussed on the Ottoman Greece and Ottoman Bulgaria articles, respectively. --Local hero talk 20:39, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • If the article name is going to change, can we please see WP:RM used in this case? It's a controversial enough issue that I don't think we should be moving it around without broader discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:44, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I expressed support to move the page a couple weeks ago and no one responded except for StanProg, who seems to be okay with it. And Shadowmorph hasn't followed up with his initial concerns from February. So, I didn't see it as a controversial move. But if a broader discussion is needed, then okay. I've given my reasoning so I'd like to hear what's wrong with it from whoever disagrees. --Local hero talk 00:51, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good Olfactory, the problem was the confusion of the article content and the categorization, where the term "Republic of Macedonia" is mixed with the "region of Macedonia". With Local hero we've managed to fix this confusion. An example: Now the cat "Macedonia under the Ottoman Empire‎" is obviously for the "Republic of Macedonia", on the other hand the cat "History of Macedonia" is for the region of Macedonia. I've fixed some of the categorization issues, but most probably there are more to be fixed. --StanProg (talk) 20:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ask not if I was absent, but rather whether the issues I mentioned were resolved. Not really, I say. First let's summarize the situation: This is what we have at the main articles:

This is what we should have on the ottoman era:

  • Ottoman Macedonia (Should be about the whole region, now wrongly redirects to this page)
    • Republic of Macedonia under the Ottomans. (Covered in this page)
    • Pirin Macedonia under the Ottomans. (Covered in Ottoman Bulgaria)
    • Greek Macedonia under the Ottomans. (Covered in Ottoman Greece)

Furthermore in the article Macedonia (terminology)#Ottoman Macedonia it is mentioned:

Main article: Macedonia under the Ottoman Empire

The Ottomans did not keep Macedonia as an administrative unit: since 1864 parts of geographical Macedonia lay in three vilayets, which also comprised some non-Macedonian areas. Northern Macedonia was part of the Kosovo vilayet and then of Skopje; the Thessaloniki (south Macedonia), and the Monastir (Central Macedonia) vilayet were also created."

Yet Macedonia under the Ottoman Empire redirects here, even though it clearly was meant to be redirected to the region. Instead people who click there would be mislead to read this 1/3 of the history.

What we have here is clearly a wrong situation.

Here is a solution: This article should be named Ottoman Vardar Macedonia to substitute the long History of the Republic of Macedonia under the Ottoman Empire (which would be according to the naming conventions). The name Ottoman Vardar Macedonia is short, to the point, disambiguated and factually correct. It is based on the name the place in question was given just after Ottoman rule was removed: Vardar Banovina. According to Template:Yug-timeline this was on 1929. Prior to Ottoman rule the place had no other name other than Soutern Kingdom of Serbia or Northern Geographic Macedonia or Upper Macedonia.

Ottoman Macedonia should redirect to Demographic history of Macedonia#Ottoman_rule or be a disambiguation page leading to all histories.

Looking forward to hearing your opinions. Shadowmorph ^"^ 08:10, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think "Ottoman Vardar Macedonia" is ok - it's strictly geographical, just like the other two parts of the region (Pirin and Greek Macedonia). "History of the Republic of Macedonia under the Ottoman Empire" is really long, but can be shorten as "Republic of Macedonia under the Ottoman Empire". Vardar Macedonia and Republic of Macedonia practically cover the same area. The question here is what naming to use - as geographical region (Vardar Macedonia) or as a region that Republic of Macedonia covers "Republic of Macedonia under the Ottoman Empire". Again, they both are ok for me.--StanProg (talk) 18:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there's anything we actually disagree on. I never intended for this page to be about the entire region so I'm fine with it becoming either "Ottoman Vardar Macedonia" or "Ottoman-era Republic of Macedonia" or something along those lines. "Ottoman Macedonia" should be a disambiguation page that lists links to this page, Ottoman Bulgaria, and Ottoman Greece. --Local hero talk 19:44, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Since we have reasonable agreement, I went ahead and moved the page. Also created new dab page at Ottoman Macedonia. I also fixed the redirects, you can check out Ottoman-era Republic of Macedonia and Macedonia under the Ottoman Empire. Seems better now imho. Good to be of service :) Shadowmorph ^"^ 09:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May I please add this to your conversation: The term: Administrative divisions, includes several regions that are not included in today's country. Therefor, the sole mention of them, and especially in this context, misleads the not-educated-on-the-issue reader, that those parts DO belong to the country and are just not under its control currently.

Example: Kosovo Vilayet The northern part of the Republic of Macedonia was located in the Kosovo vilayet. Sanjaks located in this vilayet that contained territory now within Macedonia include: Sanjak of Skopje, which included Skopje, Kumanova (Kumanovo), İştip (Štip), Kratova (Kratovo), and Koçana (Kočani) Sanjak of Prizren, which included Kalkandelen (Tetovo)

On the other hand, we have this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanjak_of_Prizren These 2 are contradicting each other to start with. Also, the wording used, is suggesting that Sanjak of Prizren is a "missing" part of today's country, which is obviously not. The same goes for the vilayet of Salonika. You cannot just say that "The southeastern part of the Republic of Macedonia was located in the Salonika vilayet". The "Republic of Macedonia" didnt exist back then, so its southeastern part could never be located in the vilayet. Instead, a phrase like "Parts of today's Republic of Macedonia (such as.....) were included in the Salonika vilayet". The same with the Prizren vilayet. --Nik_Ethel (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC).[reply]

I went ahead and changed the wording. I think it is more clear as I put it, but if you feel it isnt, we can discuss it further. Point is that "Republic of Macedonia" didnt exist back then, so it has to be described as a "region" in the first part of the sentences since they refer to the past and as a today's country in the secon part since they refer to present....--Nik_Ethel (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When we are writting about the Ottoman Vardar Macedonia, we only write about this area and not about Macedonia or Republic of Macedonia. So in this article, and since we are talking only about the region that TODAY is called Republic of Macedonia, we cannot include "the whole of Macedonia" as Local Hero is suggesting. If this was the case, then in the part about the mosques and the minarets, there shouldnt be the mentioning of square buildings, since in Macedonia (and by this I mean the actual Greek region) the minarets were build in a different manner. Also, if you continue with this logic, then you shouldnt only post pictures of square builds of minarets in today's Republic, but also in the Macedonia region. But if you folow this path, then this article gets out of way and it starts including the Ottoman Greek Macedonia, which I believe is not the purpose of this article. So to conclude, yes clarifications are needed to make it clear that we are only talking about the Ottoman Vardar Macedonia and not "the whole of Macedonia" which is in itself a disabg, and also clarification about the differences between the Ottoman rule of the 2 distinct regions, the Vardar and the Greek Macedonia. Nik ethel 10:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)Nik Ethel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nik ethel (talk • contribs)

Recent disambiguations[edit]

We need to clarify per given sources; they do disambiguate, so we must as well. Macedonian (talk) 00:07, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let's go through this by each instance.
I think saying "All of" implies that the whole thing is included. The Republic of Macedonia did not exist at this time so there is only one Macedonia we could be talking about. It's not that this is a bad edit, it's just unnecessary and makes it more complicated than it needs to be.
  • During the Ottoman rule of the region of Macedonia, cities experienced many changes with regards to the demographic makeup of their population and the look of their cityscapes.
Same thing. There was no Republic at this time, so we're only talking about the region when we say Macedonia. This instance was particularly unnecessary. Even if, for some reason, the reader assumes we're talking about the Republic, the statement is still true. Even if I replaced "Macedonia" with "Balkans" or "Rumelia", the statement is still true.
  • Most of the mosques constructed in the territory of today's Republic of Macedonia were square in shape with a three-domed portico and a minaret on the building's right side.
While I believe it is the case with the entire region, the source does only discuss mosques in today's Republic of Macedonia. So, we'll leave this one.
  • ...ending 500 years of Ottoman rule in the region of Macedonia and the Balkans.
Including "and the Balkans" tells the reader that Ottoman rule ended everywhere in the Balkans. The Balkans includes all of Macedonia, so stating "the region of" is unnecessary. --Local hero talk 01:02, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On the first instance: Indeed, but we still need to disambiguate; the article is titled Ottoman Vardar Macedonia, and a reader could mistake Macedonia with Vardar Macedonia which is not the case, since all of the region and not just Vardar was under Ottoman control. The same on the second instance, all of region's cities experienced many demographic changes, not just Vardar Macedonia. Same on the last instance: the Ottoman rule ended in the whole region, not just Vardar Macedonia. Macedonian (talk) 10:56, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
None of these say "Vardar Macedonia", just "Macedonia." Even if the reader thinks we're only talking about Vardar, the statements still make sense and are factually correct. --Local hero talk 17:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you understand what I mean. My point is that disambiguation is necessary on those passages, other ways readers will assume the whole of the region as the Vardar Macedonia. Macedonian (talk) 07:28, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why you think they'll assume we're only talking about Vardar Macedonia. If we were only talking about Vardar Macedonia, we would most likely just say Vardar Macedonia as we did in the title. --Local hero talk 15:31, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that some disambiguation is needed. It's entirely possible readers will confuse "Macedonia" with the Republic, rather than the region. Athenean (talk) 21:46, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Republic didn't come around till 1991. This is the Ottoman-era that is being discussed. Even if, as I've stated above, the reader thinks we're exclusively speaking of the Republic's current territory, the statements are still factually correct. --Local hero talk 23:06, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nevertheless, disambiguation is necessary. Macedonian (talk) 17:05, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If this is really your argument to my comments, then I'll presume no reasonable arguments can be made and, therefore, I'm right. I'm going to now make the changes discussed in my first comment. --Local hero talk 17:55, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't understand why you don't want to disambiguate. The term "Macedonia" refers to more than one topic covered in articles, hence is ambiguous, hence we need to disambiguate. That simple. User Athenean agrees as well, but still you are acting as you don't want to help the article. I'm reverting per common sense. Macedonian (talk) 15:52, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to help the article? I'm the one who wrote it. And I don't find it particularly surprising that Athenean agrees with you. I would search for other opinions but this is such a minor thing that became a big issue and doesn't need to get bigger. Anyways, I'm changing the wording so this discussion can end. --Local hero talk 17:50, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't take me wrong; the article is good, but it can always get better and disambiguation won't harm it whatsoever. Nevertheless, I think the changes you made are constructive. Macedonian (talk) 09:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was no administrative region called Vardar Macedonia[edit]

Please correct the name of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geotol (talk • contribs) 22:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article doesn't claim that there was a region in the Ottoman Empire called Vardar Macedonia. Not sure what your issue is. --Local hero talk 15:27, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is still a technical issue. This article's title technically violates WP:NOR. "Ottoman Vardar Macedonia" is not a term used in the scholarly literature. The title was apparently coined by User:Local hero. (I am not related to User:Geotol; I just intervened in this discussion.) --Omnipaedista (talk) 14:00, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Macedonia know as Greece in 1995 Greece is know as Sount Macedonia[edit]

- Me 89.205.80.225 (talk) 09:41, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:North_Macedonia_under_the_Ottoman_Empire&oldid=1206856441"