Will someone kindly elaborate on what the policy on sport is regarding North Macedonia? Everyone knows the country plays as North Macedonia per its sovereign name but apparently its governing body "Football Federation of Macedonia" has been a bit slow on the uptake in getting its name modified properly. Today I am learning things I never knew before but I get the impression I'm being taken for a ride. Any comments? Sportspop (talk) 19:26, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Adjective form in the first sentence of an article
There has been some disagreement at the Gun law in North Macedonia article on how to interpret MOSMAC when the adjective form is used in the first sentence of an article. Previously some edit warring occured over whether is should start Macedonian law allows... or NorthMacedonian law allows..., which has been changed to Gun laws in North Macedonia allow... to avoid the contentious adjective form. However the disagreement still stands, specifically should the first sentence of an article about North Macedonia that uses the adjective use Macedonian or North Macedonian.
The 4th point of the close of the 2019 RFC was no consensus on which form should be used, and WP:MOSMAC says In the absence of a clearer consensus on which of the two to prefer, it is recommended to use the longer form where ambiguity might be an issue (especially on first introducing the topic). The shorter form can be used where the topic of the country is already established in context..
I've tried to describe the situation as fairly as possible. If anyone believe this should be changed just say so. Kluche, Local hero, Carpaniola, FrederalBacon, Nil Einne, Ivanavram, Cullen328 (that should be everyone who has commented on the issue at the article talk page or ANI). -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 15:43, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In my personal opinion the core of the disagreement is around whether the context of the sentence is set by the article title or not, and if it is then the longer form doesn't need to be used. I believe, separately from this specific issue, that articles should start with the naming convention of the article title. So if we have an article titled William Smith it should start William Smith, also known as Billy Big Shoulders..., not Billy Big Shoulders, also known as William Smith.... With this specific issue I'm of the opinion that the adjective form should be avoided, and thereby avoid the heated disagreement that surrounds it. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 15:43, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My opinion is that avoiding the adjectival form in the lead sentences of articles about topics related to North Macedonia also avoids unnecessary conflict in a contentious area. Cullen328 (talk) 15:54, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, at a start of an article, either 'Macedonian' or 'of North Macedonia'/'North Macedonia's'/etc. should be used. When there is a lack of a clear consensus (i.e the section of MOSMAC you refferenced), the adjectival form should be avoided entierly (i.e 'North Macedonian' should not be preffered when there is no consensus). That way it lowers the chance of conflict regarding the adjective. I also think that 'North Macedonian' should only be used when there are issues of ambiguity. Kluche (talk) 16:20, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion is just in regard to how the adjective should be used in the first sentence of the article, not the wider issue of the using the adjective. MOSMAC already gives guidance of which form to use in other situations (e.g. the longer form should only be used when first introduced or to avoid ambiguity [as I pressed post I realised I should say this is outside of areas of nationality/etc that are covered in MOSMAC separately]). Also I don't see how blankly stating that only Macedonian should be used lowers the chance of conflict, as that is the conflict. Certainly not using the adjective form would avoid conflict, as the none adjective form is a settled matter. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 20:45, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ActivelyDisinterested I meant to say that when there is no clear consensus on whether or not 'Macedonian' or 'North Macedonian' should be used, instead of recommending the longer form, in my opinion the adjectival form should be completely disregarded, as to minimize conflict.
As for at the start of an article, I'm fine with what I stated previously, either 'Macedonian' or 'of North Macedonia'/similar forms. While I do agree that conflict may arise if 'Macedonian' is used. Kluche (talk) 17:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Avoiding the adjective form would certainly eliminate conflict, as Cullen328 stated. I suppose we go with that unless there is a specific consensus emerges on a given article that adjectival use is necessary. The scope of this would be limited to the first sentence of articles covering topics about state institutions/laws/entities. --Local herotalk03:05, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that the only users challenging this were actually the same person. So, I don't foresee this becoming an issue again now that the socks are banned. However, if it does come up, I hope that we could easily find a formulation like was done on the Gun law article. The Macedonia (region) article isn't really tied into this issue, as it basically only relates to things tied to the entity of North Macedonia. The Assembly of North Macedonia lead sentence is fine without either North Macedonian or Macedonian. I think most lead sentences will align with the article title, as we see in the Assembly article but also in North Macedonian passport. --Local herotalk03:33, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Sorry for speaking instead of Local hero, but I can guarantee that Local hero will never agree with the usage of North Macedonian anywhere, and I added a new update of what happened the last hours that shows the obsession of Local hero with North Macedonian. FYI you can look at this sockpuppet investigation to understand what Local hero and Kluche try to achieve. None of them will accept MOSMAC. Nikokiris (talk) 20:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This comment doesn't deal with the specific question at hand, and risks derailing the discussion
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Comment: In 2022 North Macedonia protests I made some edits that add "North Macedonian" in front of "Prime Minister" and "Foreign Minister" including additional amendments. Local hero reverted only those edits that add North Macedonian although the reason for my edits [was explained] Bulgarian and Albanian prime ministers are reported explicitly, the North Macedonian is not, causing confusion to the reader, I improve the text per MOSMAC: "in line with the reliable sources, adjectives may still be used when referring to such institutions in generic terms (e.g. the Greek and North Macedonian prime ministers), especially where the possessive form would be grammatically cumbersome or unnatural.", North Macedonian as natural and not cumbersome as Albanian and Bulgarian.
This change improved ambiguity as explained in the comment, it is according to WP:MOSMAC that suggests "North Macedonian" by giving "North Macedonian Prime Minister" as a concrete example. MOSMAC states: However, in line with the reliable sources, adjectives may still be used when referring to such institutions in generic terms (e.g. the Greek and North Macedonian prime ministers), especially where the possessive form would be grammatically cumbersome or unnatural..
The reason I used the adjective "North Macedonian" instead of "of North Macedonia" is because the same was used for the Albanian and Bulgarian Prime and Foreign Ministers. No reason to handle North Macedonian differently.
I left a message on Local hero's page and he reverted my edits again. I am really disappointed from the tolerance shown to Local hero and other users who violate MOSMAC every day. A few days ago, we had the same problem in Gun law in North Macedonia where Local hero and Kluche coordinate edits and form consensus, like they did in North Macedonian denar too.
The hope of this discussion was to come an agreement that all sides could agree with. I haven't editted this topic area, and have noticed that there has been problematic editting from all sides. As I said at the Gun Law article, if anyone believes that any editor has behaved in an inappropriate way then that should be reported to the appropriate notice board (e.g. WP:ANI, WP:SPI, WP:ANI/3RR). But you should make sure to back up anything you say with diffs. This discussion is specifically in regard to how the first sentence of an article should be handled. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 20:31, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Extremely problematic instruction
"In historical contexts referring to events between 1992 and 2019, Wikipedia articles will continue to refer to the country by its then-current official name, i.e. "(Republic of) Macedonia". Where necessary, explanatory notes such as "(now North Macedonia)" may be added to such references (e.g. Kiro Gligorov became the first president of the Republic of Macedonia (now North Macedonia), or: Kiro Gligorov was the first president of the newly independent country (then called Republic of Macedonia)) Adjective references for these topics should follow the same logic. Historical adjectival references to the state entities should remain "Macedonian". The term former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia or any of its abbreviations will not be used." The official name of the country during this period was, according the country itself, was "Republic of Macedonia". On the contrary, the United Nations, and many countries of the world, recognized the country as "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia". Also, the term "Macedonia" when it's referring to the country of North Macedonia, is consdered irredintist, for the reason that the state is only a part of the wider region of Macedonia, and almost completely outside the ancient land of Macedonia.
Question a): Why "the term former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia or any of its abbreviations will not be used"? Who decided this, and by what criteria?
Question b): Why is "Republic of" enclosed in parentheses? It is logical that there should be points in the entries in which reference will be made to the then name of the state based on its constitution, but I would ask that an instruction be added that not only does not have parentheses, but specifies that "the use of an earlier term for the country, should be carried out under its then full constitutional name ("Republic of Macedonia")". Using the term "Macedonia" alone is confusing, as it refers to many things, the last of which is North Macedonia (wider region of Macedonia, ancient Macedonia, Greek region of Macedonia, all of which go by the name "Macedonia") . Finally, based on the reason that the Prespa Agreement was signed, the use of the term "Macedonia" for "North Macedonia" is a sensitive and controversial issue, as for the Greeks such a thing is an act of irredintism against them. Greek Rebel (talk) 02:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@EdJohnston there are 5 years from then. I want to open new request. And the discussion must be without Macedonian Slav POVs. Macedonia CANNOT refer to North Macedonia. It is irredintist and pseudo-science. Greek Rebel (talk) 11:40, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What we have now is a hard-won compromise. It's unlikely to be completely re-done just because one editor disagrees with it. As you may be able to tell from the date of WP:ARBMAC, people have been arguing about this for 17 years The question has already gone through all possible steps of dispute resolution. Please note that the word you're using is properly spelled 'irredentist'. If you have some spare tine, consider reading all the past discussions of the Macedonia naming issue. EdJohnston (talk) 14:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@EdJohnston, I read it,and I really don't understand the reason that "FYROM" cannot be used and why you call the country's previous name as "Macedonia". Even with the country's previous constitution, it's called "Republic of Macedonia". The term Macedonia, cannot refer to the country. Because it is a wider region (modern) and also a region that is almost completely in Greece (ancient). Greek Rebel (talk) 15:16, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Controversial exception for State-associated and other public entities
Multiple editors have recently raised the need for a new RfC (see this and this) and I see another two (@Greek Rebel:@EdJohnston:) above discussing WP:MOSMAC.
The last sentence of WP:MOSMAC tells us Article names, categories, and templates should avoid adjectival use altogether.. This sentence was not part of the 2019-RFC, the closing panel of which found consensus and tells us Both "North Macedonian" and "... of North Macedonia", where a similar form would be used for other countries. e.g. the North Macedonian Government or the Government of North Macedonia.
This weird sentence was pushed by a single Editor (Flavr Savr) who was involved in the RFC2019 and who refuses "North" and "North Macedonian", and found this way to go against the result of the RFC2019 and community consensus. Later the problems caused by this sentence was raised in Talk:2019 North Macedonian presidential election#Article title move and a significant majority of Editors agreed that the controversial sentence should be deleted from WP:MOSMAC but it remains till today.
In October, I opened two move requests, to move Macedonian denar to "Denar of North Macedonia" and my argument was this specific statement (I was not aware that didn't have community consensus back then) and my proposal was rejected. Then I proposed to move Nationality law of North Macedonia to "North Macedonian nationality law" because apparently this sentence of WP:MOSMAC didn't convince anyone in the first RM but surprisingly the second RM was rejected because a participant of the RM claimed that Article names, categories, and templates should avoid adjectival use altogether..
After endless discussion and two move reviews (see this and this), double standards were enforced by a small number of participants in the two RMs, and one Editor (Local hero) pushed the agenda of overlooking WP:MOSMAC by presenting contradicting arguments, once in favour of the controversial statement and once against the controversial statement, but in both cases in favour of avoiding "North Macedonian" which is recommended by WP:MOSMAC.
The decisions of the RMs (local consensus) override community consensus established in WP:MOSMAC which goes against WP:LOCALCONSENSUS.
We should see the problem from a scientific point of view. The minimum we have to do is writing the real community consensus in WP:MOSMAC and then use it without long discussion with WP:SPA editors who are here with an agenda in a narrow topic. If we fail to do that, how can we make progress and write an encyclopedia if we always need to discuss already established community consensus? If every time we want to apply what WP:MOSMAC suggests we need to reopen a discussion, what's the point of having WP:MOSMAC?
If WP:MOSMAC is obsolete, then a new RfC is necessary. What is the process to follow and open an RfC?
