Talk:Florina

Recent edits

Esslet, your changes are problematic. The original version of the sentence reads:

In 1896 French diplomat and traveller Victor Bérard visited Florina and describes the settlement as containing 1500 houses of Albanians and "converted Slavs", around 100 Turkish families, and 500 Christian families. According to Berard the "Slavs" considered themselves Greeks and spoke Greek."

Your alteration reads: In 1896 French diplomat and traveller Victor Bérard visited Florina and describes the settlement as containing 1500 houses of Albanians and "converted Slavs" -who, according to Berard, considered themselves Greeks and spoke Greek- , around 100 Turkish families, and 500 Christian-Greek families.

The bit cited by Hart from from Bérard reads: "The French traveler Bérard describes it in 1896 as consisting of 1500 houses of Albanians and “converted Slavs,” with perhaps a hundred “Turkish” families and 500 Christian families. “These Slavs nonetheless call themselves Greek and speak Greek—with us at least” (Bérard 1911 (1896):307)."

Your alteration does not conform to the source. Your change of by adding "who, according to Berard, considered themselves Greeks and spoke Greek- " after the bit on the Muslim population implies that they spoke Greek and considered themselves Greek, which is not the case and distorting what the inline states. You also removed additional information about the Slavic population of Florina and Greek affiliations and replacing it with "500 Christian-Greek families". You also added some sentences such as "In 1821 the Greeks were about 80 families." without even placing an inline or full details about the reference like year etc for a editor to go find and verify. The comment about deletions was in relation to previous edits when you added content while at the same time deleting others and not noting it .Resnjari (talk) 23:01, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

@Resnjari, Ok so first of all about my first edit: "...who, according to Berard, considered themselves Greeks and spoke Greek". The bit from Bérard is just numbering all the different ethnicities living in Florina. In the previous form, there was emphasis given for no reason(cause that's what happens when you write something in a different sentence) in the fact that the “converted Slavs” <<consider themselves Greek and speak Greek>>. I just took that sentence and put it right after the people it refers to, the “converted Slavs”. If I write: "This jar contains A, B -which is sweet-, C and D.", I think it's really obvious to whom the sweetness refers, B.

You write: " You also removed additional information about the Slavic population of Florina and Greek affiliations and replacing it with "500 Christian-Greek families" ". I'm really not sure what you are talking about here. I did not remove anything, I just added the word "-Greek" next to the word "Christian" because that is what those Christians were.

About the sentence: "In 1821 the Greeks were about 80 families.", the source is pretty clear I think, the only thing I don't have is the year it was published, but every other important information is there including the book title, the volume, the author and the page number.

Finally, about the only sentence I deleted: "In the late 19th century, it became a centre of Slavic agitation for independence from the Ottoman Empire", I did delete that initially and I will do again maybe only because it's a significant claim that needs a strong source but there is no citation for it at all. For all I know, it could be a centre of Greek agitation for independence, just like many other Greek regions nearby...

And one more thing, please be more careful next time about some things you do. I'm talking about that template/message you added in my talk page for no reason and without even having a conversation with me previously. By the way, don't you have to be an admin to add that?

Cheers, Esslet (talk) 09:51, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Esslet, your changes are still problematic. Converted Slavs in that context are in reference to the Muslim population, not the Orthodox as they are placed between Muslim Albanians and Muslim Turks in the sentence. The Christian element is separated and then information is given on the Slavs who are not converted. Your alteration of the sentence as i said previously infers that Muslim Slavs, along with Muslim Albanians spoke and felt Greek which is original research. The previous sentence structure did not mix these things and kept things separate in a neutral way. On the other edit you made, again you still have not provided an inline at the very least. I don't and other editors don't know if the author meant Greek in the sense of local Slavic people affiliating with the Patriarchate or they were Orthodox Greek speaking people (Romioi), or local Aromanians with Greek sentiments. This needs to be outlined with an inline. Considering that adding such content can be controversial, more information is required as the onus falls on you the editor who made those changes. If you don't provide these, the tags will be reinstated until you or some else provides that information in addition to year etc of the Greek author. On Florina and surrounding area in the late Ottoman period, it was involved in the whole Ilinden events, hence Slavic agitation. The Slavic history of Florina needs more work as does the Muslim Albanian and Turkish past of the town of whom they constituted a large part of its population. As for templates, no i don't have to be an admin. I added it because it was heading into an edit war. I don't know what you mean by "sweetness", but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not for POV editing.Resnjari (talk) 19:14, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

@Resnjari, I'm really sorry but I have a hard time understanding what you are trying to say. You write: " Your alteration of the sentence as i said previously infers that Muslim Slavs, along with Muslim Albanians spoke and felt Greek which is original research. " How does my edit infer that? The sentence starting with "who..." is right after the 'converted Slav' part. Not only that, but the more I read the inline (that I can see you added), the more confused I get: " The French traveler Bérard describes it in 1896 as consisting of 1500 houses of Albanians and “converted Slavs,” with perhaps a hundred “Turkish” families and 500 Christian families. “These Slavs nonetheless call themselves Greek and speak Greek—with us at least” "

In the way this is written it seems unclear whether he means that there were 1500 houses of Albanians and "converted Slavs" + 100 Turkish families + 500 Christian families, OR that there were 1500 houses of Albanians + 100 'Turkish' and 500 Christian families that(the last two) he describes as "converted Slavs", OR that there were a TOTAL of 1500 houses of which in some lived Albanians and on the rest 100 'Turkish' and 500 Christian families that(the last two) he describes as "converted Slavs", OR that there were a TOTAL of 1500 houses of which in some lived Albanians, in some "converted Slavs", in some 100 'Turkish' familes, and in some 500 Christian families?! So maybe you can enlighten me on that first of all(if you also know for sure of course) and go on from there on that matter...

Now about that other edit, I can see what you are saying and I agree that we can add a template asking for an inline citation if there is such a template, or something like that anyways. What I can tell, however, is that one thing the source does not mean is: " Greek in the sense of local Slavic people affiliating with the Patriarchate ", as you write. Such people would be called Orthodox Slavs, not Greeks -Ethnicity is one thing, religion is another. And there is also not much to work on regarding the "Muslim Albanian" past of the town by the way, if you are trying to seed "large parts" of Albanians everywhere, that sounds like your problem.

About the template, I was expecting an apology but I didn't get one. Seems to me that, according to you, when it's heading into an edit war we can just put irrelevant templates to people's talk pages, without even having a conversation with them before.

Finally, you write: "I don't know what you mean by "sweetness", but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not for POV editing." Just a simple look at your history says it all about who edits according to POV, for many years now. (You can also read: Sweetness by the way, but please try not to add any pro-Albanian POV sentences there, I'm sure you could find a way if you wanted to) Esslet (talk) 23:08, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Esslet, i added that inline and i understand it well. Berard is clear. The sentence structure is this. "The French traveler Bérard describes it in 1896 as consisting of 1500 houses of Albanians and “converted Slavs,” with perhaps a hundred “Turkish” families" all of this is in reference to the Muslim population. Berard then follows on by adding "and 500 Christian families." He separates this part by stating "and" and then following it on. In the next sentence he describes the Christian population and their Slavic/Greek identity issues. On the other matter you still have not added a inline for your source. How is one supposed to know what you have written is really based on that source ? Florina is known for its Slavic element and its historical Slavic countryside. The sentence you wrote needs elaboration or until such time the tags need to be there. As for Muslim Albanians and Islam being an important part of Florina's past that is historical fact and not about "seeding" whatever that means. You are new, i guess so i am going down this talkpage route with you. On templates, due to recent events i now follow the example others editors have set.Resnjari (talk) 23:30, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

• @Resnjari you write: "In the next sentence (i.e.: According to Berard the "Slavs" considered themselves Greeks and spoke Greek.) he describes the Christian population and their Slavic/Greek identity issues." Now how did you end up on that conclusion when he says that the "Slavs" considered themselves Greeks and spoke Greek?

• Another thing is, how do you know that the Albanians, those 'converted Slavs' and the Turks were all Muslims? In the inline you provided it doesn't seem to clarify that, how can you tell that they were Muslim instead of Christian, when Berard only mentions their ethnicity and not their religion? So, please, a clarification on that part from you would be great. Now, even if Berard did mean that the Albanians, the 'converted Slavs' and the Turks were Muslim, that 'with' there before the Turkish families needs to be removed because as it stands now it makes it seem like BOTH the Turkish AND the Christian families were considered “converted Slavs” by Berard . So it could be written as: "The French traveler Bérard describes it in 1896 as consisting of 1500 houses of Albanians and “converted Slavs”, about a hundred “Turkish” families" and also 500 Christian familes", so the separation of the Muslim from the Christian population is somewhat more clear, if I understand the sentence correctly.

• By the way, is your source in English or you translated it? And if so, could you please share the original sentence?

• On "the other matter", I told you in my previous reply that I agree on adding a template asking for an inline citation or something similar, didn't you read it?

• "Florina is known for its Slavic element and its historical Slavic countryside.": Slavophone element not Slavic, there's a difference. "As for Muslim Albanians and Islam being an important part of Florina's past that is historical fact and not about "seeding" whatever that means.": Oh I think you know what that means.

• "You are new, i guess so i am going down this talkpage route with you.": Yeah thanks, you're gonna be a great dad. Seriously, do not try making this seem like it's my problem.
• "On templates, due to recent events i now follow the example others editors have set.": You might need to elaborate on that a little

I transformed the text into a bullet list, so you can clearly read and answer ALL the issues I mention above, because you didn't seem to do that in your previous replies. I read your responses word by word and answer below, so I expect you to do the same or else you make me repeat myself for no reason.Esslet (talk) 11:12, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

@Resnjari, you still haven't answered the above questions and you are easily heading into edit wars all the time. Esslet (talk) 11:53, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I have answered your questions. We were both going in circles. The sentence in the article was therefore adjusted to most resemble Berard.Resnjari (talk) 05:25, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

We are not going in circles (yet, at least). You just have not answered my 3 questions from 11:12, 9 August 2017 (UTC). Your adjustment was towards the right direction but, still, the source itself is unclear(and I explained why above). If this is the case, as per WP:DISPUTED according to which: "The accuracy of a statement may be a cause for concern if: It contains information which is ambiguous and open to interpretation, either due to grammar, or opinionated wording." and WP:STICKTOSOURCE according to which "In general, article statements should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages, or on passing comments. Passages open to multiple interpretations should be precisely cited or avoided." , it will have to be removed. For now, I'm just adding some relevant templates for a while. Esslet (talk) 12:11, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes i did as i outlined the reasons above. I am aware of the policy and based the sentence upon the source. Your adjustment inferred that Muslim Albanians and other Florina Muslims spoke Greek and were somehow Greek. That is problematic to say the least. Muslims never identified with Hellenism, not one bit.Resnjari (talk) 12:52, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

That was my initial adjustment and it did not infer that, nor does it matter cause I now realise the source is unclear on this particular statement and you don't actually understand it either it seems, cause you've made numerous personal assumptions and interpretations of the source as I noted on my replies above. Once again, for example, you claim that these Albanians mentioned by the source were Muslim and once again I ask you how do you know that.

By the way, I thought there are Greek Muslims living in Thrace and I also thought I had two Greek Muslim friends there but I guess you know better, right?... Esslet (talk) 21:26, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Because the sentence is split between the first part that refers to Muslims (Turks, "converted Slavs" -what were they converted from if not to Islam etc) and the second part which refers to Christians directly. On Albanians there is no mention of Orthodox Albanians being present in Florina town -unless you have something saying otherwise. Current Arvanites from Flambouro, Drospigi etc migrated from the interwar period onward to Florina. You know people from Western Thrace that are Muslims and ethnic Turks, ok good and i know people here in Melbourne that are from Florina, that speak Macedonian (or Slavika depending on ones view) with some being for a Greek identity others a Macedonian (Slavic) one and many family splits over the matter. I can speak their language, i am familiar with your one of course and fluent in my mother tongue, Albanian. I am personally familiar with Florina because my fathers village is on the other side of the border and his relatives used to live in Muslim Albanian villages (i.e Niki, previously Negoçan -now inhabited by Pontians) on the other side before they were forced to Turkey in 1923 as "Turks" -interestingly they still speak Albanian after all this time. I have also been in the area. There is more than enough scholarship on Florina that is absent from the article. I have placed some source below for those with time at the moment.Resnjari (talk) 11:35, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Your story is interesting but I'm not really sure why you mention all these things, I just provided a personal example because of your claim that "Muslims never identified with Hellenism, not one bit", which seems completely inaccurate. (By the way, I said I have friends that are Muslim Greeks, not Turks as you wrote for some reason...). Now about the Berard part, again, the fact that he writes 'Christians' at the end of that sentence doesn't mean that all the other ethnicities he mentions before are Muslims. I'm not saying that they couldn't be, just that, based on the sentence, such a claim would be original research. He doesn't even clarify what those "Christians" were(Greeks, Albanians, Turks?). The sentence, as I also mention above, has even more issues like for example the numbering of the houses in Florina and to whom they belong to. It's basically a mess and for all these reasons, unless of course someone can clarify it without a doubt, it has to be removed. Esslet (talk) 12:24, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Your story is interesting to about having a few Turkish friends, and yes they are Turks even if the state does not acknowledge it. Above comments were about noting. that i am familiar with the complexity of the Floriniot identity issues. Berard wont need to be removed as its clear. More content needs to be added to this article regarding its transformation from a Slavic and Muslim settlement into a modern Greek one. This article is very underdeveloped.Resnjari (talk) 10:01, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

What are you talking about?! What does "the state" have to do with what I said? I told you I KNOW them, they are Muslim Greeks, I'm not telling you what any state is acknowledging or not but what those people are and self-identify as! I never said there aren't Muslim Turks in Thrace, I just said there are Muslim Greeks as well and provided a personal example which you are rejecting and making fun of for some reason. What do you want Resnjari? To rewrite history and alter the facts to match your personal beliefs and "sources"? Next time think before you write. Finally, your source about the houses in Florina is unclear, deal with it or clarify it if you can. Esslet (talk) 13:22, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

That's all good that you know them. That still does not change the reality that Muslims in Western Thrace are ethnic Turks (even the ones that are Slavophone, i.e Pomaks a large part think of themselves that way) and over the years the community has sbeen trying to get themselves recognised as such instead of being refered generically as Muslims. Facts are facts (read in whole: Konstantinos Tsitselikis Old and New Islam in Greece: From Historical Minorities to Immigrant Newcomers . I always think when i write, its why i write.Resnjari (talk) 14:06, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Of course there are people who identify both as Greek and Muslim, and most of these (converts aside) are from the Muslim minority in Western Thrace, which has been assimilated while keeping their religion, and many members do identify as Greeks. However their origin and identities in the source-relevant period of late Ottoman times were mainly Turkish and for some villages, Pomak (/Muslim Bulgarian). They also live in West Thrace, not Florina, for the most part. There was also a Muslim population that spoke Greek and practiced ethnic Greek customs that resided south of Florina near Grevena, but pretty much all of these were deported. Whether or not "Greek Muslims" exist should not be the topic here -- there are no sources reporting the existence of "Greek Muslims" in any sense of the phrase (Greek-speaking, Hellenism, whatever) that have been presented afaik. If and only if one is should they be mentioned on a page about Florina. --Yalens (talk) 20:53, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Another manipulated sentence: "In it he writes that "[a]bout the houses in Florina, we should indicate that there are at most 3000, with half of the population Albanian, Slav and Turkish Muslims and the other half Christian and (about 300) Bulgarians."

The corrected version according to the source provided: "Austrian diplomat Johann Georg von Hahn visited the city in 1861 and wrote about it in his travel log From Belgrade to Salonica. In it he writes that "[a]bout the houses in Florina, we should indicate that there are at most 3000, with half of the population Albanian and Turkish Muslims and the other half Christian Bulgarians." IE linguist (talk) 21:41, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Claim of source falsification

Not really sure what the dispute is here, but there seems to be a lot of reverting. Lately between Alexikoua and IE linguist; it seems Resnjari and Esslet seem also previously involved based on the talk page and the history, and so they should be notified too I guess. Alexikoua you just made a huge deletion[] saying that IE linguist was an SPA and that he (she?) source falsified. I checked contribs and the account seems pretty new and people often only edit one article in their first few days, so I'm not sure "SPA" is the correct term here. Also not how I like to see newcomers treated, especially as I would love to have more linguists on here. But anyhow source falsification is a pretty serious claim (especially when used against newbies), and you didn't substantiate it. Would you care to substantiate what you are accusing IE linguist of falsifying? Bit busy right now but I think it is much better for all sides to discuss here rather than edit war, for the sake of general positive Wikipedia climate. --Yalens (talk) 03:32, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Also IE linguist, forgive me if I accidentally just notified you a bunch of times. Sometimes us older users never really learn how to do certain things well, oops :). --Yalens (talk) 03:39, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@Yalens it's actually a typical case of disruption: someone creates a brand new account and directly jumps to an ongoing edit war and instantly reverts. Being more precise about "source falsification" the editor claimed that "the town became a centre of Slavic separatism." in WWI but unfortunately Baltsiotis doesn't confirm this.

Off course we need to treat a new user carefully but not of this kind (performing massive reverts from account creation? I assume are you kidding). Since we are talking about inappropriate behavior towards new editors we have a typical case of Wikipedia:BITE here [] by posting ARBMAC warnings as a very first warning to a new account.Alexikoua (talk) 07:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Anyway apart from the above editor's expressed concerns, the main question here is are the edits done by IE linguist of merit/relevance to be reinserted back into the article, by possibly another editor? On my part i will have some hours spare a little later to give a better reply. Best.Resnjari (talk) 08:10, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hahn is clear. he has described the town without Greek inhabitants.Jingiby (talk) 14:26, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

There is also an additional problem with IEL.'s barrage of edits: the various demographic estimates (new and old) are about the region (kaza, prefecture etc.) not the city itself. Thus they are not representative for this article.Alexikoua (talk) 20:48, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok, however Eselet recent contribution to the page which kickstarted the addition of regional demographic material of kazas etc as opposed to just the town are also not representative for this article. Move that content to Florina (regional unit)?Resnjari (talk) 09:56, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

I didn't add anything of what you are claiming I did. Be more careful. Esslet (talk) 13:31, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

You added content on Kazas, i.e district demographics. Check your own edits > . This article is about the town. There is a article on the district.Resnjari (talk) 14:08, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

THAT WAS ALREADY THERE RESNJARI, it's just how my edit is presented on the revision page for some reason for god's sake!... Esslet (talk) 21:13, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

I looked into that, your right though its strange that the system highlighted that as a change. Might be a wiki glitch. Anyway that part ought to be transferred. Before its done and to avoid time wasting discussions that go nowhere thereafter, anyone objects to it being transferred to the relevant page about the district (if so why)?Resnjari (talk) 17:55, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Although technically it could be transferred, the text and the history section in particular is consistent as it is now. Moving only that part to the(less popular I guess) article about the regional unit will create a 'gap' here and it will also look kinda weird there having some historical info only about the early 20th century. The only section regarding the history of the town of Florina and the surrounding region exists in this article. Moving only partial information to the regional unit article and keeping other here will create a mess. I suggest we keep everything about the history of Florina and the region in this article and so I'm asking you to please not move it for the above reasons. Esslet (talk) 20:52, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Having the district info here kind of makes having a separate Florina district page redundant. Otherwise why two separate pages. There was a similar issue at the Korce page and Greek editors felt that district information should be transferred from the city page to the district page -regarding in particular demographics. I don't see why an exception ought to be made here. This article does purport to be about the town.Resnjari (talk) 06:40, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

OK, move it, but some of the added sources yesterday describe the composition of the 1500 households of the town of Florina and distinctively of the Florina kaza with over 10,000 households.IE linguist (talk) 18:16, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Florina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060603051657/http://www.florina.gr/ to http://www.florina.gr/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060603051657/http://www.florina.gr/ to http://www.florina.gr/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111019025438/http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/eden/themes-destinations/countries/greece/florina/index_en.htm to http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/eden/themes-destinations/countries/greece/florina/index_en.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:53, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Article full of lies!!!! Please correct it to be REAL and USEFUL for people, not for propaganda!

1. You say it has "another names", and you fail to mention the name that many of its inhabitant use in their native language: LERIN. Why you do not mention that for the city? You go back in some theories about green vegetation, while you fail to see the REALITY - LERIN ! Please add, in brackets, after the name: Florina (Greek: Φλώρινα, Flórina; Macedonian: Лерин, Lerin). That is how REAL encyclopedia will look like. Look how it is written for Istanbul, even though there are almost ZERO greeks there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istanbul

2. This is also disinformation: Lerin (Florina) is not in the "Northwestern Macedonia", but in the Southwestern Macedonia. Northwestern Macedonia is Tetovo and Gostivar. Look on the map. Wikipedia should be used for INFORMATION, not for lying to people.

3. There are many more lies on this page, but I bet you will delete this, so why waste my time anymore? I saved this, so I will post it to many other places, if nor reacted, to show how WIKIPEDIA is not true and should not be trusted! 77.28.174.109 (talk) 08:15, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm fine having "Lerin" in the lead, instead of just in the name section. Slavophones have historically been and still are a significant population of the town. --Local hero ^talk 05:02, 14 May 2023 (UTC)