Talk:Georgi Pulevski

Where is it?

Thank you for another reference. Please provide location of original publication. Reference to references is no substitute for the original. We have already gone through this with a previous quoted document that apparently establishing a clear 'Macedonian' ethnicity in the late 19th century. But only the references were provided. Closer inspection and research proved there was no such document and the 'document' was almost certainly conjured up in the 1960s. It only existed in reference, and never in fact. My feeling is that the term 'Macedonian' was never in the original but was introduced in the referencing process. This has often been the case since the 1950s, in the official process of constructing a 'Macedonian ethnicity'. So, where is the original and what does it say? Look forward to it. Politis (talk) 12:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Which do you mean, the "Grammar"? I gave the full bibliographic details, it was published Sofia 1880. Friedman [1] gives the full bibliographic entry as follows: "Pulevski, Gj. (1880) Slavjano-naseljenski-makedonska slognica retovska. Sofia: Ugrin Diikov." Apparently the text is also contained in a modern edition of P's collected works, Gjorgija M. Pulevski, Odbrani stranici., ed. B. Ristovski, Skopje 1974. About the term "Macedonian" being contained in it: Again, according to Friedman, Pulevski in his "Grammar" called the language našinski or slavjano-makedonski; the title translates as "the language of the Macedonian Slavic population". What else is unclear? If you want to insinuate the whole work might be a forgery, the ball is in your field to find reliable sources to that effect; we have absolutely no reason to engage in any such speculation. The work has been described and accepted as authentic in the most reliable of secondary literature (Friedman is the leading authority world-wide). That's really all we need. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Get rid of that Mac-Bul silliness

Can we please release this poor innocent article from the iron grip of the on-Wiki Macedonian-Bulgarian feuds? This whole structure of having a "pro-Macedonian" and a "pro-Bulgarian" section is absolutely awful. You know, guys, even if it's hard to imagine for some of you, there might be readers out there who might actually be interested in other questions than whether he belongs to the one or the other nation. There might even be readers who wouldn't give a rat's.

By the way, why is the whole "Pro-Bulgarian activities" section only quoting primary sources? Let me guess: somebody forgot WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT? Could there be a tiny chance "WHEREYOUGOTIT" was another of those third-rate nationalist websites that's being mimicked here, rather than a reliable secondary source? Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

English language usage

As Fut.Perf. already explained English language usage defines the name of the article. So Google books:

1. Georgi Pulevski 15 hits
2. Gjorgija Pulevski 2 hits

Google Scholar:

1. Georgi Pulevski 14 hits
2. Gjorgija Pulevski 2 hits

To sum it up - on the same bases on which the article Makedosnko devoiche is with the MK transliteration, this one has to be Georgi Pulevski. Any further POV moves will be considered disruptive. --Laveol ^T 18:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

This article has a tinge of pro-Bulgarian tendencies, especially in the last part, with no citations what so over, edited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.56.76 (talk) 15:33, 17 July 2008 (UTC)