Talk:Stracin–Kumanovo operation

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

Fake[edit]

This article is complete non sence. Is this a part of that on going revision of the history. Of bed is good, of war is peace? 🤔 My God such a lies on this thread, shame of you. Татунчо (talk) 20:48, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PPS Во времето кога се водеа борбите за Штип, V бугарска дивизија стоеше наполно пасивна на Злетовска Река, а дури по ослободувањето на Велес тргна во правец кон Скопје и ноќта меѓу 13 и 14 ноември, со наредба од Главниот штаб (издадена е на лице место усно), беше вратена назад за Бугарија, пред да стигне целата дивизија во Катланово.

Извор: Михаило Апостолски, Завршните операции на Н.О.В. за ослободувањето на Македонија, Кочо Рацин, Скопје.https://okno.mk/node/42288?fbclid=IwAR1wg4tTR9CMvJAxX1yfkAUCoPMAfi9k7P_1zQqN_41Bujsmdj0DizKO2f8 Татунчо (talk) 21:26, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is English Wikipedia, please post in English so that other editors can understand what you are trying to say. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:16, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yugoslav communist propaganda written by Bulgarian renegade ca. 70 years ago is not the most reliable source. Jingiby (talk) 17:59, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgarian road sign.[edit]

Ентусиастъ, this note is really not an improvement. This image was uploaded by me and I do not understand your point to note the significance of a Bulgarian road sign. There was no explanation from your side when you have added this note. This is absolutely normal road sign, since the city was under Bulgarian control till 09 September, the same year. Discuss the issue and clarify your POV and the significance of this note. Thanks Jingiby (talk) 07:14, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute for neutrality[edit]

The article is strongly biased towards the Bulgarians, not offering anything close to an attempt to be neutral. It blatantly insults the partisans and offers only biased sources which have a vested interest in insulting the partisans to back that up. Furthermore, the history on this is not settled yet and for each source that claims one thing from one side, the other side has a source that claims the complete opposite. Strong claims over history in this period and area should be avoided, much less using those to blatantly insult the people of an entire country. Despite all that, no matter the actual truth, which is still up in the air, neutrality must be maintained on Wikipedia. The main example of this is the whole section about "Political debasement". --AMD64 is cool (talk) 15:09, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia rules: "an unbalanced or non-neutral article is one that does not fairly represent the balance of perspectives of high-quality, reliable secondary sources. A balanced article presents mainstream views as being mainstream, and minority views as being minority views. The personal views of Wikipedia editors or the public are irrelevant." With more than 50 sources, almost all of which are academic and credible, and most of them non-Bulgarian, the claim for lack of neutrality and one-sidedness must be substantiated. This can be done with several dozen similar sources (non-Yugoslav) of the same rank (Academic 21th. century English language publications). If there are any, please present them here for discussion. If not, consider that your personal judgment is not a reason to place this tag and can not justify it. See for example: For information on the military situation in Macedonia and Serbia and the role of the Bulgarian army see FO 371/43608, R17271, 24/11/1944; FO 371/44279, R16642,14/10/1944; FO 371/43630, R19495, 24/11/1944; WO 208, 113B, 12/9/1944. The sources, which contain intelligence reports from BLOs, confirm the decisive role of the Bulgarian army in the liberation of Skopje, Nis, Prilep, and the Morava Valley. For more see: Dimitris Livanios, The Macedonian Question: Britain and the Southern Balkans 1939–1949, Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2008; ISBN 9780199237685, p. 134. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 08:59, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That may be true regarding sources, but the tone and style is unencyclopaedic, especially of the "Political debasement" section. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:47, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Peacemaker67, there was set already a template about problems with copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, and spelling. In this way a new POV-template is redundant. However, I agree that the first template is correct. May you edit the section "Political debasement" to bring it in accordance with style, tone, etc. Thanks in advance. Jingiby (talk) 10:59, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to, but without access to the sources, I wouldn't be confident to do it. Also, they are mostly in Bulgarian, which I can't read, and relying on Google Translate is fraught with danger. FWIW, the tone makes it POV. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:40, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I may help to you if there are linguistic problems. Many of the sources in that section are in English, but the half are in Macedonian and Bulgarian as follows:
  • Michael Palairet, Macedonia: A Voyage through History (Vol. 2), Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2016, ISBN 1443888494, p. 212.
  • Sfetas, Spyridon. (2012). The Bulgarian-Yugoslav dispute over the Macedonian question as a reflection of the Soviet-Yugoslav controversy (1968-1980). Balcanica. 2012. 241-271. 10.2298/BALC1243241S.
  • Михаило Апостолски, Завршните операции на НОВ за ослободување на Македонија, „Кочо Рацин“, Скопје, 1953.
  • In fact Skopje was liberated by Bulgarian forces, while the Macedonian Partisans remained in the surrounding hills, and came down only to celebrate their entrance to the city. Similar scenes occurred in many other towns of Macedonia and Serbia, pointing to the fact that, from a military perspective the Russians were right: the Bulgarian army was the only force capable of driving the Germans quickly from Yugoslavia. Needless to say, the official Macedonian historiography, written mainly by Apostolski himself, understandably played down the crucial role of the Bulgarians. The glorification of the Partisan movement, an essential component of the post-war Yugoslav political culture-and more personal Partisan considerations left little room for such “technicalities”... For information on the military situation in Macedonia and Serbia and the role of the Bulgarian army see FO 371/43608, R17271, 24/11/1944; FO 371/44279, R16642,14/10/1944; FO 371/43630, R19495, 24/11/1944; WO 208, 113B, 12/9/1944. The sources, which contain intelligence reports from BLOs, confirm the decisive role of the Bulgarian army in the liberation of Skopje, Nis, Prilep, and the Morava Valley. For more see: Dimitris Livanios, The Macedonian Question: Britain and the Southern Balkans 1939–1949, Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2008; ISBN 9780199237685, p. 134.
  • Коста Църнушанов, Македонизмът и съпротивата на Македония срещу него, Университетско изд-во "Св. Климент Охридски", София, 1992, стр. 370.
  • Венко Марковски, "Кръвта вода не става", София, издателство на БАН, 1981 стр. 100.
  • Anatoliy Prokopiev, Bulgaria's Preordained Choice in 1941 and 1944, p. 83, in: Multinational Operations, Alliances, and International Military Cooperation Past and Future, Center for Military History, U.S. Army, Government Printing Office, ISBN 0160872421, 2006, pp. 77-85.
  • The first unit, which entered at 18.30 Skopje, already left from the Germans under the pressure of the Bulgarian army, was the intelligence cavalry platoon of the Second infantry division of the 4th Bulgarian army. For the liberation of Skopje contributed also detachments of the Second infantry division of the First Bulgarian Army. They forced the withdrawing Nazi detachments to retreat the city and on November 13th at 11pm took under their control the southern and the southeastern areas of the city. At the midnight they seized also its center. Georgi Daskalov, Bulgarian-Yugoslav political relations, 1944-1945, Kliment Ohridski University Press, 1989, p. 113; (in Bulgarian).
  • Военно-исторически сборник, том 37, Институт за военна история, Военно-историческа комисия при Щаба на армията, 1968, стр. 34.
  • Захариевa: Бугарите не биле фашистички окупатори. Тогаш на 13 ноември партизаните го ослободиле или го окупирале Скопје од Бугарите Ное. 13, 2020, Во Центар.
  • Sheri Linden, ‘The Liberation of Skopje’: Film Review; 12/6/2016 Hollywood reporter.
  • Македония с нов филм против българската окупация (трейлър); OFFNews.bg 27.09.2016.
  • Йордан Величков, България срещу Третия райх, 22 юни 2015, Епицентър.
  • Sinisa Jakov Marusic, Bulgaria Sets Tough Terms for North Macedonia’s EU Progress Skopje. BIRN; 10 October 2019.
  • Зоран Заев: Договорът с България ще бъде закон. Меdiapool публикува интервюто на Любчо Нешков, собственик на информационната агенция БГНЕС. 25 November, 2020; Mediapool.bg.
  • Sinisa Jakov Marusic, North Macedonia PM’s Remarks About History Hit a Nerve. BIRN, November 26, 2020.
  • Мария Атанасова: Мицкоски: Заев да внимава с приятелството с България, Факти.бГ. 25 Ноември, 2020г.
  • VMRO-DPMNE leader Mickoski demands PM Zaev's resignation, announces more protests. MIA, 26 November, 2020.
  • Любчо Георгиевски: Хората са шокирани от Заев, защото не познават миналото. Епицентър, 28 ноем. 2020.
  • Владо Бучковски: Македонците съществуват от 1944 година, българите са по-стар народ. 2 дек. 2020, Епицентър. Jingiby (talk) 12:01, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stracin–Kumanovo_operation&oldid=1214110037"