text:
Talk:North Macedonia/Archive 1

Talk:Republic of Macedonia/Archive2

Untitled
this is Macedonian Language !

But there is no such language as Macedonian Slavs. -- Zoe "Makedonija" is foreign word for the skopians slav language ! This is greek name ! See "makedonia" ! Vergina 06:43, 6 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be moved to either "Macedonia" or "Republic of Macedonia", countries are entitled to call themselves whatever they want, FYROM is just beuro-speak dml

for dml ! Gratulation for the People clon ! Macedon 12.04.2003

I see Wikipedia's purpose mainly to learn something from it. Since I come from a relatively small nation I can't tolerate any kind of nationalisms, whether it is Macedonian, Greek, Slovene, German, American or any kind. Serbs used to say: "Serbia all the way to Tokyo" and we know what happened in the 1990s in former Yugoslavia. Another fact is that I come from this sad historical state form. I know some history and I've never heard about a nation called Macedonian Slavs or as Zoe says about a language with the same name. So I peacefully appeal to those who make contributions to similar sensitive articles to keep in mind facts and truth. It is very easy to sully historical events. It would be very interesting also to know who devided a region called Macedonia to three main parts, which nowadays reside in 3 different states. My nation and many ethnical regions also resides in 4 different states and I am shure you have to endeavour yourselves to find any kind of modern Slovene nationalism in the World's scene. I can shout it loud: "Slovenia to North Pole", but this won't help me much. Best regards.

STOP the Skopje PROPAGANDA!! 62.47.28.215  25.04.2003

 * What? I gave a peaceful appeal. I respect both Greeks and Macedonians -- so you should too. The actions of Greek government after Macedonia's independence seem precedent to me. Nations should evolve normally irrespective of the political situations. --XJamRastafire 14:35 Apr 25, 2003 (UTC)

What objections do people have to the following changes:
 * removing the links to "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" & "F.Y.R.O.M." which both redirect to "Republic of Macedonia"
 * Clairifying the status of the name "Republic of Macedonia" (It is the country's constitutional name)
 * linking the statment "language´s status discussed" to Talk:Macedonian language

The pharse "language's status discussed" is taken from the OEM web site. It's entirely out of context here and has no reason to appear. I've endeavoured to make a sensible link on the page, but the fact is, that web site really doesn't talk about languages at all, but about peoples. -- Toby 11:13 19 May 2003 (UTC)

 Now I see what you did! My mistake!2toise 18:01, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)

WikiProject Countries
Does anyone want to put this page into the regular country format, with a map etc? - 2toise

 * I added the box and a map for a start .. -- User:Docu

 * I removed the FYROM from "Republika Makedonija(FYROM)" in the caption of the box, as the template suggests to use local language. -- User:Docu

The convention is to start a Talk:Republic of Macedonia/Temp and then merge later. --Jiang 21:53, 6 Oct 2003 (UTC)

FYROM,the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,as "Republic of Macedonia" is fabrik for folgery Greek history,Greek culture,Greek geography and Greek symbols Macedonians!See Greek Macedonian symbol "Vergina Sun",Philip II king of Macedonia and Alexander the Great king of Macedonia !!! Vergina 21:14, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * So? The controversy has been explained. I don't think a "Republic of Macedonia" exists within Greece. --Jiang

President of Macedonia! This "Macedonia" and "Vergina Sun" ? http://www.macedonianpride.cjb.net/      Vergina 06:27, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * You havent answered my question. What do you want us to get from the link? I don't see your point. Please try complete sentences so I can understand you. --Jiang 06:49, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Mr.--Jiang is the state  Name Taiwan or Republic of Taiwan ?? Vergina 09:04, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Neither - Taiwan is the Republic of China. Secretlondon 09:14, Oct 8, 2003 (UTC)

 * (via edit conflict) Neither. The Republic of Taiwan existed only in the year 1895. Taiwan currently does not exist as a state. The only political entity named "Taiwan" is Taiwan Province, which is not a state. The state govering Taiwan is the Republic of China, and that's where the template is. References to Taiwan as a state/country are only done when (erroneously) equating the Republic of China with Taiwan.

 * Are you suggesting that this article be moved to Macedonia, like how CNN call it? --Jiang 09:19, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Mr Jiang! The name "Republic of Macedonia" is not identical to Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.Vergina 08:30, 15 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * Duh! I know that the latter has "Former Yugoslav of" tacked in front of it. I think that is evident for anyone who can read. The statement you added is worthless. --Jiang 08:38, 15 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Vergina.. what exactly is the point you are making? - fonzy

Well, the crux of the issue is that it is not universally recognized that the people who refer to themselves as "Macedonians" are, in fact, Macedonians. The Greeks claim the term as legitimately applying only to Northern Greeks (i.e. from the historical region of Macedon), but it has since around the late 18th century been expanded to include parts of Bulgaria and the Former Yugoslavia, for whatever reason (there's argument over this issue, obviously). So the current situation is that, for the past 200 years or so, there has been a region known as "Macedonia" that is about 50% in Greece, 25% in Bulgaria, and 25% in the country with capital in Skopje, that calls itself the "Republic of Macedonia". The 50% in Greece is the portion that corresponds roughly to the historical Macedon, so the Greeks claim that neither the Bulgarians nor the former-Yugoslavians have the right to call their regions Macedonia. So far the UN and all major international bodies and most countries have deferred to the Greek position and refused to recognize the self-proclaimed "Republic of Macedonia" by that name, instead referring to it semi-neutrally as the "Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia," as it is an undisputed fact that the region used to be part of a Yugoslavian Republic that was, during the period Yugoslavia still existed, named "Macedonia". As for how to resolve the conflict, I'm not entirely sure. --Delirium 08:46, Oct 15, 2003 (UTC)

 * An added note: I do think its controversial nature needs to be mentioned, both there and in at least some places where it's linked from. Simply saying things like "borders the Republic of Macedonia" without commentary is akin to saying "borders the Israeli region of the Golan Heights" without noting that Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights is not universally recognized. --Delirium 08:48, Oct 15, 2003 (UTC)

Another note (because I feel like saying it): FYROM is the term always used in the Eurovision Song Contest (so far). - fonzy

How about using the convention (Former Yugolslav) Republic of Macedonia (i.e., putting the F.Y. in parenthesis instead of part of the link or leaving it out)? But even with this "semi-neutral" qualification, it is not at all clear why it is added to someone who has not read about this issue before. --Jiang 08:52, 15 Oct 2003 (UTC)

If we claim to be a reference work, we must list countries under their official names. Regardless of PsOV, the name of the country is FYROM. 2toise 15:12, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * The official (i.e. constitutional) name is Republic of Macedonia. --Jiang 19:59, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * True, and that should be noted, the name is contested. Many countries have aspirations to terratory or recognition of something that the international community does not recognise. We just need to make clear that it is only in FYROM that the country is officially Republic of Macedonia.2toise 05:56, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

There is a name agreed by everyone, and should be used. That name is FORMER Yougoslav Republic of Macedonia. There is no Republic of Macedonia other than in the imagination of people. Is this Encyclopedia going to be about facts or fiction? If you have issues with that name take it up with the United Nations. Thanks.

 * The constitutional name is Republic of Macedonia. Is the consitution fiction too? Don't assume that the UN is some fair and moral organization. It's run by its member states who have to push their own agendas. The Associated Press uses "Macedonia" (w/o the Republic of or FYRO). --Jiang

 * Let me see, the government of the state has agreed to the name FYROM. The government of that state is elected by its people. I am sure they have more authority than you on the matter. It is even mentioned in the article that they have come to this agreement. Why do you insist on mentioning non facts? The ignorance of people mentioning the said state as "Macedonia" has a lot to do with inaccurate articles like in this Encyclopedia. There was a treaty where FYROM agreed to be called that. There is not much more to be said. Let someone who abides with international laws and naming conventions do the editing please. At the moment you are just biased and not scientific. Look at the following and you may realise why the agreed term should be used. --193.195.0.102

 * That's interesting "Jiang". You edited my chosen name. Why is that? Don't I have the same "rights" as the so called "Macedonians"? Maybe you get the idea now? We are not what we call ourselves. The UN has the ultimate last word on how this state should be called. Not you, not me. --193.195.0.102

 * What you are doing now is getting close to vandalism. You signed the previous talk block with someone else's signature - it was not written by Jiang, as everyone can easily prove with the edit history of this page. And changing the article to say FYORM, also known internationally as FYORM is nonsense. andy 16:41, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * That's funny. On one hand you openly support identity theaft by calling FYROM just ROM, but on the other you don't approve it when it is done in a much smaller scale. It is easily proved that there is only one state that is internationally recognised under the name Former Yugoslav Republic Of Macedonia, but this didn't stop you or "Jiang" from missreporting it. Here, have some more of your own medicine. 193.195.0.102 (was andy)

 * I am not Jiang. And you only devalue your own point by such childish signature frauds. andy 16:48, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * On the contrary I am just using your own logic against you. You claim we have the right to call ourselves whatever we like. No? 193.195.0.102 16:49, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * Still waiting for an answer. Maybe if you don't have one, you have no objection me calling myself whatever I want to? 193.195.0.102

No. Like other news agencies it 'tops' (ie starts articles) with "the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" and having contextualised its reference, uses "Macedonia" and "FYROM". Ditto with other news agencies, all major international organisations, major broadcasting organisations, in Europe, Asia, Australasia and the Americas. The 'Republic of Macedonia' is simply not used, except by Macedonia itself and a handful of supportive organisations and states. FYROM is the correct term to use. Just because a state proclaims a name for itself does not mean that name automatically has any validity. The Irish constitution calls the Irish state Éire and until 1998 insisted that Éire consisted of the entire island of Ireland, but no-one accepted it (including most Irish people). Italy calls itself the Italian Republic yet again that name is rarely used. Just because a state claims something does not make it a reality. Éire has long since been dropped and replaced by the Republic of Ireland even though technically that isn't a name at all, but as the Republic of Ireland Act makes clear a description. The reality is a lot less simple than is being suggested. Choosing to use the 'Republic of Macedonia' when the name is in dispute and unrecognised in law internationally is expressing a viewpoint on the debate, thus POV. Using FYROM, as every other organisation does, as a temporary name pending agreement on an accepted name, is more NPOV. In any case does Macedonia speak english? Is its constitution in english? If not, even the claim that its name is 'Republic of Macedonia' is dodgy on linguistic grounds too, as that term in that english form would not exist in the constitution as signed into law by the President. :-) FearÉIREANN 22:07, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * Take a look at this article: FYROM is not mentioned once in the article. I'm not familiar with this issue. What is the Macedonian (or whatever you want to call these people) position on using FYROM? Of course Italy is not at Italian Republic and Republic of Ireland is not at Éire because we are supposed to 1) use common names  and 2) use English.

 * What is most common here? The media uses "Macedonia" but that usage would be POV, like with China/Taiwan. Is FYROM POV? Chinese Taipei is POV. --Jiang 22:26, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)

"Macedonia" is the Pseudonym name for FYROM !! ---Vergina 22:41, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)

That article proves my point, Jiang. It pointedly does not use the formal name, simply Macedonia. It is, like most newspaper articles, a truncated version of the original AP wire report, and having written wire reports, I know that most use the definitionary name in the opening sentence, the colloquial name in the rest of the text. I can guarantee that AP, Reuters and the other big agencies don't use Republic of Macedonia but FYROM as the definitionary name, just as they use Republic of Ireland, then Ireland, United Kingdom, then UK or Britain, United States, then US. And no, BTW we are not supposed to 'use english'; we are supposed to use the version of the name used in english. Éire (without the fada over the 'E') is used in english, notably by the English tabloids and right wing press for reasons that are rather too complicated and irrelevant to explain here. They also use taoiseach in preference to prime minister, punt more often than Irish pound, etc. Wikipedia, like much of the media, does not use english but native words generally used in english (eg, 'kaiser' not 'German Emperor', 'Tsar' more often than 'Russian Emperor', etc.) FearÉIREANN 22:51, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)

So why is this state sill wrongly described as "Republic of Macedonia"? "Republic of Macedonia" was a province of Yugoslavia, not an independent state. It was called that for about 45 years within the Yugoslavian state. That's why it is now called "FORMER Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia". Because it is not the Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia any more. That's the name it has now. I don't understand why you insist on calling it something else. You fail to show a valid reason for not calling it with its proper _internationally_ accepted name. Thus unless somebody has a valid objection other than "that's how ignorant people call it", I will revert the article so that it abides to UN legislation and does not offend anyone. Cheers. 193.195.0.102

 * FYROM is by no means "official", as you state it. It is only a temporary label. The UNGA resolution does not capitalize "former": .The "Republic of Macedonia" is the official and consitutional name, and as such, it exists.

 * Note that this article is not at the Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. --Jiang 20:36, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * How can it be official when it has not been officially recognised by this name? Is this a habbit of yours to totally disregard FACTS? Look, from the source you gave:

 * "this State being provisionally referred to for all purposes within the United Nations as "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" pending settlement of the difference that has arisen over the name of the State."

 * Notice the quotation marks? They mark the full name ""FORMER YOUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"". Not ""REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"". Ok? 193.195.0.102

International recognition has no bearing on the official name of a state. A state is made a state by its internal characteristics, not by whether other states choose to establish diplomatic relations with it. Again, how can something "provisional" be official? You see only the words within the quotes and fail to notice everything around them. "former Yugoslav" (with former uncapitalized) serves a disambiguating purpose. It's a temporay reference, not an official one. How else would the first word of the title not be capitalized? --Jiang

 * Yes it should be linked to the article. And the topic of the Article should either be "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" or "Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" where it is explained that there was never an independent state with that name.

 * It is totally irrelevant to talk about their constitution when discussing international recognition, not internal consumption. You still don't answer why you chose to ignore that even FYROM itself agreed to that name. This was not unilateraly inforced by the UN as the article states. It was a trilateral agreement between UN, Greece and FYROM. The name "Republic of Macedonia" does not exist anywhere else but in FYROM itself and inaccurate quotes. Yes, FYROM is a temporary name but ROM on the other hand is no name at all. For all you know, Greece may inforce a second embargo and then FYROM may as well be renamed to Vardarska Banovina, as it was called before Tito named it "Macedonia". This is exactly like me chosing to sign my posts with you or someone elses name. Do I have the right to do it just because one day I chose to call myself Jiang? Strange but when i did it, there was a whole raw, so I suppose you are with me in this.

 * It is definitely sad that FYROM does not adhere to the treaties it signed and the UN legislations it has accepted. It is even sadder that an encyclopedia decides to totally ignore facts and follow the opinion of ignorant people. I have seen people say that they call it "Republic of Macedonia" because that's how they saw it on the news. What a load of nonsense. The "news" overwrite the UN I suppose. If it is on the news it is official, right?

 * Still since nobody has shown why a name used only for internal purposes in that country is used in an international encyclopedia I will make a suggestion. I suggest, to put a mention that they call themselves "Republic of Macedonia" internally but nobody else officially does and change all references of "Republic of Macedonia" to "former Yougoslav Republic of Macedonia". Have you anything better to suggest or should I go ahead and fix it? 193.195.0.102

The the best of my knowledge, the name was agreed upon because (and only becuase) of intensive lobbying by Greece (you said it yourself when you brought up an embargo). The agreement does not ask the Republic of Macedonia to amend its constitution and change its name into FYROM. The name is used by governments around the world to avoid offending Greece. This encyclopedia is not a government. We don't need to adhere to these guidlines. I don't see how you can just ignore the constitutional and legal name here. We do care about what is the case internally.

Is the UN some higher moral authority? Why should we adhere to whatever terms the UN uses? Yes, the news media does override the UN, since the common usage is determined largely by the news media. Actually, the news just calls it "Macedonia" and leaves out all the rest. What do you want - Republic of Macedonia or Macedonia? --Jiang

 * The best of your knowledge is not that good then. I don't see how you just ignore the internationally official name of that state.

 * Stop trolling. You don't make sense. The constitutional name of that state means nothing internationally unless this state is recognised by the UN. It is like you are saying that you can declare a constitution for yourself at any day and have a country name you chose to and also name that country United States of America. I have illustrated this numerous times but you STILL ignore to address it. The UN IS the naming authority. The UN IS the only recognised international authority. The UN is NOT an organisation that can be bullied by a small country like Greece. The UN has not even allowed countries like the US, Russia and China to bully it so stop being ridiculus suggesting that the Greek pressure led to that decision and treaty, ESPECIALLY since FYROM also agreed to it. The agreement clearly is there and FYROM has agreed to it, yet somehow an irrelevant guy out of nowhere (you) decides to totally ignore it and create an issue out of nothing. You are clearly trolling using this Encyclopedia as a mean.

 * It is at least stupid to say that the news override the UN especially since I bet 100% that for most pieces of news you can point at, I can point another news agency that may oppose it.

 * You say that governments around the word (elected by people around the word) don't want to offend Greece, but this Encyclopedia has no problem offending it by lying. If this is a policy, I would like you to point me at it, since I can't seem to find it.

 * On a side note, you still yet have to tell me whether it is ok for me to sign with your name or whatever name I declare myself to be, which I assume means you do not condone identity theft. For the last time, stop trolling and let people who have some better knowledge of the issue (not from the "news") edit this page to be correct.

 * Thus based on all the above I still believe the change I proposed should go in, and the article should be renamed to "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia." with a mention that in that state they use the name "Republic of Macedonia.".

The international name of the state is not ignored. It is stated clearly in the article what it is and why the consitutional and international names differ.

I have a feeling that you're the one who is trolling. The system won't allow you to sign in as Jiang, but you can sign in as Jiang1, Jiang5, Jiang's Mother, etc. All these names are different from the one and only User:Jiang (me!). Does a Republic of Macedonia exist in Greece? It is only a province that exists. If a Republic existed, we would move this to Macedonia (country).

 * The troll calls me a troll now. It is not me who denies to answer simple questions put. This is the 3rd time I am asking. Do you condone to identity theft? Do I have the right to assume your identiry because I woke up one day and decided to call myself Jiang? Is't there an authority I need to address in order to have my name changed to Jiang? Would I be called Jiang even though this authority has not accepted this change? When you answer all this questions maybe you will grasp the idea behind UN recognision. Until then you remain ignorant, and you insult people who know what is going on behind this matter.

The UN the one and only organization? LOL Let's see...

The constitutional name of that state means nothing internationally unless this state is recognised by the UN.

We are not merely concerned with international protocol. We are concerned with what happens domestically too. When people visit Skopje they say they visited Macedonia (and not all the longish offical rubbish).

 * Maybe if they didn't have false information from guys like you, they would correctly address that country with the one and only name it has been recognised. Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Do you tell me that this Encyclopedia's purpose is to propagate false information?

Not all states in the world are UN members. So the Holy See and Republic of China don't exist, right? The consitutional name of a country matters if a state exists. It has nothing to do w/ UN membership.

 * So, since you claim that there does not exist an authority for recognising states, I can create my own state and call it whatever I like, right? I say this is complete nonesense. Without some basic agreement between states this world would be even more chaotic than what it is now. Just because you like chaos it doesn't mean it has anything to do with facts. An Encyclopedia is about FACTS not opinions of trolls.

 * Yes, you may call your state whatever you like as long as your state meets all the qualifications of being a state. The Democratic Republic of the Congo exists, and was created right next to the Republic of the Congo. It does get confusing when states have similar names, but there's nothing preventing them from establishing such names. --Jiang

It is like you are saying that you can declare a constitution for yourself at any day and have a country name you chose to and also name that country United States of America.

No, that consitution is meaningless if I don't have a state to go w/ it. There is only one Republic of Macedonia, not two. There are also two Congos, two Koreas, two Chinas...Comments?

 * Actually there is no state with the name Republic of Macedonia. Never was one either. And what actually makes a "state"? Your whole point is moot, and you have not actually answered my question. If me and a freind or two decide to make a "state", are we allowed to call it whatever we like? Yes or no?

 * Let's go by the Montevideo Convention of 1933, the most cited source for the definition of statehood, which states that a state must possess a permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states. And notably, "The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states." If you and your friend decided to make a state, you would not count as a state as you dont have " (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states." But if your organization satisfied those characteristics, you are a state. Nowhere does it say in any sort of international agreement or document that states may not name themselves whatever they wish. --Jiang 21:24, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

The UN IS the naming authority.

Since when? How has it been given this authority? The UN is an international forum, not a world government. It was never designed as a world government and doesn't function as such.

 * Are you THAT ignorant? Please if you are, refrain from editing this page. If there is no a name authority in UN then why did FYROM apply for a membership and was only accepted on the terms of using that name? This must be a really hard question for you to answer. This "international forum" requires its members to adopt its legislation. FYROM by becoming a member accepted those. You on the other hand, live in denial for some strange reason which can't probably be other than trolling to offend people like me.

 * The UNGA resolution states that FYROM is "being provisionally referred to for all purposes within the United Nations". there was never a decree to ask country to amend its consitution to change its name. the name is used solely for international organizations. FYROM only accepted that label for use within the UN, and the UN only asked it to do so because of Greece. The UN does not care what the FYROM chooses to call itself in its constition. --Jiang 21:24, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

''The UN is NOT an organisation that can be bullied by a small country like Greece. The UN has not even allowed countries like the US, Russia and China to bully it so stop being ridiculus suggesting that the Greek pressure led to that decision and treaty, ESPECIALLY since FYROM also agreed to it.''

Hmm...read China and the United Nations and tell me that countries arent using the UN for their own political gain. Just because the FYROM agreed to it doesnt mean it thought it was fair or had another choice. The Greeks had nothing to do with this? Why else would they bother to butcher their own name? You tell me.

 * Are you really that ignorant? Of course Greeks had something to do with it. It was part of THEIR ethinc identity being stolen from a country that had unjust territorial claims towards them. You seem to have no idea whatsoever how the situation in the Balkans is. This treaty was signed to bring ballance and it did. Yet people like you chose to ignore it and keep offending one side of the agreement without reason. And FYROM did not "butcher their own name". Their own name is actually "Vardarska Banovina", they only existed as "Republic of Macedonia" within the Yugoslav state. I suggest you read some history on the subject.

 * According to the CIA factbook, "local long form: Republika Makedonija". That apparently translates into "Republic of Macedonia". --Jiang

Hm, I feel like I'm feeding a troll. Otherwise, Im dealing with some very sorry soul. --Jiang 10:26, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * This is funny. It is you who ignore the facts and refuse to answer simple questions. It is you who is the troll and I am obviously feeding you but you don't like the food. Unless somebody else has an objection, I will proceed and apply the changes. That is, use "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" as a reference everywhere and just mention that internally they call themselves "Republic of Macedonia". 193.195.0.102

Assessment comment
Substituted at 21:59, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:North Macedonia/Archive 1


text:
User talk:Samia~enwiki

That article was not copied by me, it apeared to have been there for ages. I have only made some changes in things that were not correct.

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them;

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

P.S. Please do not move pages like Sandbox.

Hello again. The article you created at Belly dance appears to be copied from. Unless you are the author of the original information and you are able to release it under the GFDL then the page will need to be deleted. Please see Copyrights for further information. Even if this is a copyright violation, we would still welcome any original contributions from you. See the instructions on how to edit a page for more info. Thanks. Daniel Quinlan 11:38, Nov 14, 2003 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Samia. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Samia~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 02:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:26, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Samia~enwiki


text:
Talk:The Sheriff of Nottingham

There is nothing here that wouldn't be better placed as a note in the entry Sheriff of Nottingham ...unless one is counting up the sheer number of one's 'new articles' User:Wetman

title: Talk:The Sheriff of Nottingham


text:
Talk:Missing square puzzle

Discoverer for this illusion
Any history or discoverer for this illusion? Ivan 03:16, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)

The example of vanishing area puzzles was reported in the book “Libro d’Architettura Primo” by Sebastiano Serlio, an Italian architect of the Renaissance (even though Serlio didn’t notice that any area had actually vanished!). The first description and mathematical explanation of the vanish paradox was found in a math puzzle book with a very long title: “Rational Recreations in which the Principles of Numbers and Natural Philosophy are clearly & copiously elucidated, by a Series of easy, entertaining, interesting Experiments among which are all those commonly performed with the Cards” by William Hooper (1774). - G. Sarcone, source: PUZZILLUSIONS, Archimedes-lab.org, Carlton Books Ltd, ISBN 1844420647 I believe that this was done before Hooper In 1769 Edmé Gilles Guyot (1706-1786) described the vanish area paradox in the second volume of his Nouvelles récréations physiques et mathématiques  (both first editions have the same mistake in the problem) Nice puzzle Ed. :-) Perhaps my diagram's too small - it works best when large, I think... Evercat 22:45, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * Just perfect, kittie-cat. Meow! Thanks for the verbal and graphic clarifications. Now let's fix global warming, okay? ;-) --Uncle Ed 14:49, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Curry's paradox
The lead relates that the paradow has been attributed to Paul Curry. Then, it stated:
 * Ever since, it has been known as Curry's paradox.

But an editor changed this into
 * Ever since, it has not been known as Curry's paradox because of a paradox of a similar name.

Clearly, Curry's paradox is unrelated. I have removed both versions, pending a source clearing this up.--Noe (talk) 06:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

redirected Vanishing area parodox here
Martin Gardner, amongst others, calls this the "Vanishing area paradox", so I created that page as a redirect to this one. (And curiously Google ranks this page as the #2 search result for 'vanishing area parodox' even though the phrase doesn't appear in the article.)Loren Rosen (talk) 21:36, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Sam Lyod's dissection Paradox
I still don't understand this paradox. If the surface area of each individual shape is measured, the two triangles are 12 units each, and the two trapezoids are 20 units each, which equals 64 squared units in total surface area. When the pieces are arranged into a rectangle, the surface area is 65 squared units, although it contains two triangles of 12 and 2 trapezoids of 20 which still equals 64 squared units. How did that magical 1 squared unit appear?

 * You forgot to sign your post. In the 5X13 rectangle, the pieces don't actually fit together in the grid. If you look at the right edge of the purple triangle, it is three units in length, but the green triangle does not actually fill the rest of the five units; it is actually 1 7/8 units wide at that point. In other words, if the top and bottom edges of the rectangle are on the grid lines, what appears to be a diagonal is actually a long, thin quadrilateral (actually a parallelogram)with area 1.

In the diagram having a supposed area of 63, the edges of the diagram cannot actually be on the grid lines unless the pieces overlap. For example the right edge of the peach-colored piece is five units long, while the width of the green triangle at that point is 9/8 units, so to fit them onto the grid, you have to overlap them by an eighth of a unit. The "diagonal" is the same parallelogram as before, but now it's an area of overlap rather than a space.--Syd Henderson (talk) 22:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

 * The text following "forgot to sign your post" has apparently caused this page to be about 3 times W   I   D   E   R  than normal. Can someone fix this?Racerx11 (talk) 00:17, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. –Schmloof (talk · contribs) 00:33, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That was quick, ThanksRacerx11 (talk) 02:36, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Bent Hypotenuse
If the "hypotenuse" is actually not a straight line, doesn't that make the final shape a quadrilateral? --Thegargoylevine (talk) 02:58, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It does indeed! Schmloof (talk) 02:17, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Missing square puzzle.svg to appear as POTD
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Missing square puzzle.svg will be appearing as picture of the day on March 9, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-03-09. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:37, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Further application
See this x3 application and videos. Yug (talk)  11:46, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Infinite Chocolate
My daughter was distressed by an animation that supposedly shows how you can infinitely remove one chunk of chocolate from a bar and rearrange it to get a whole new bar. Some sketches suggest the answer is that the shapes don't really fit as they are drawn, just as in this puzzle. What looks like a straight break across the bar is presumably bent. If so then perhaps the chocolate puzzle (which seems to have become an internet [meme] should be referenced in this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.251.105 (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * FYI I've seen the chocolate bar you're talking about; the trick in that one is that the size of the bar subtly changes as the pieces move around - i.e. the video is somewhat doctored. The size of the squares in the bar "grow" after it's cut into pieces, so that it takes up the same amount of space after removing a piece. -Hatster301 (talk) 16:03, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Removed link
I removed a link to a video by Azulejos Jansenson. At first glance, this video looks like a variant of the missing square puzzle, but the effect seems to be accomplished in part by editing the video to unobtrusively substitute a different set of pieces. If I am correct, it is neither an optical illusion nor a legitimate puzzle, but a "camera trick", and therefore doesn't belong here. -- 06:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree; the video is definitely edited, and pieces are surreptitiously switched during non-contiguous transitions. For example, look at the size and shape of the squares when the pieces are inside the frame at 2:15. Then, after the pieces are removed and laid out on the table (2:35), it is clear that the squares no longer display the same uniformity, especially those along the "crack" across the middle; some are elongated taller, while some are smushed shorter, clearly indicating that the pieces laid out on the table are not the same pieces that had previously been inside the frame.

Easier-To-Understand Demo Request
It would be great to see an animation that takes this a little further to make it easier to see--if the hypotenuse were bent enough to lose two squares after the transition, our eyes would be able to see what's happening here quite easily. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.165.172 (talk) 04:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Another version - what sorcery is this?
There's a gif floating around that doesn't just do one magical piece, it does it twice AND puts the pieces back into a frame showing that the entire puzzle neither grew nor shrank. I'll link it here for discussion, rather than on the page because, while it's different enough, I can't find an original video source that doesn't eliminate camera tricks. https://www.gif-vif.com/gifs/What-sorcery-is-this-115/ -- Snicker undefined°€ 07:15, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Missing square puzzle


text:
Thanos Mikroutsikos

Athanasios "Thanos" Mikroutsikos (Αθανάσιος (Θάνος) Μικρούτσικος; 13 April 1947 – 28 December 2019) was a Greek composer and politician. He is considered one of the most important composers of the recent Greek musical scene.

Personal life
He was born on 13 April 1947 in Patra. He was the older brother of Andreas Mikroutsikos, who is also a musician/composer and a television show host. His wife was children's author Maria Papagianni, whom he married in 1996. He died on 28 December 2019, after a long fight with cancer, at age 72.

Music
He studied piano and composition in the Philharmonic Society of Patras, in the Hellenic Conservatory, and privately with Yiannis Papaioannou. In addition, he studied Mathematics in the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. He began composing at the end of the 1960s but only officially debuted in 1975, with the release of his album Politika Tragoudia ('Political Songs'). He continued on this compositional path, setting to music the poems of Giannis Ritsos, Vladimir Mayakovsky, Manos Eleftheriou and Bertold Brecht, amongst others.

His albums Kantata gia ti Makroniso (Cantata for Makronisos), Fouente Ovehouna (Fuenteovejuna), Troparia gia Foniades (Hymns for Murderers) and Mousiki Praxi Ston Brecht (Musical Practice on Brecht) are characteristic of the climate of Metapolitefsi or Regime Change that was taking place in the period 1975–78. In particular, the Cantata for Makronisos, a pioneering piece in which Mikroutsikos experimented with atonality was extremely well received in international music festivals and an interpretation of particular note was recorded by Maria Dimitriadi.

His next album, Stavros tou Notou (Southern Cross), set to the poetry of Nikos Kavvadias, opened up further musical avenues for him, combining theatre, electronic music and atonality (a second album, Grammes ton orizondon, set to the poetry of Kavvadias was released in 1991). With the same devotion to poetry, he continued to set the works of Giannis Ritsos, Alkis Alkaios, François Villon and Constantine P. Cavafy, amongst others. In addition, he has written an opera, Eleni (Helen) and set to music several children's fairytales.

He has worked with many renowned singers such as Maria Dimitriadi, Haris Alexiou, Manolis Mitsias, Dimitris Mitropanos, George Dalaras, Vasilis Papakonstantinou, Christos Thibaios, Miltiadis Paschalidis, Rita Antonopoulou and Giannis Koutras, amongst others. His music has been particularly well received and recognised in Western Europe. During his compositional career, he has managed to liberate the form of Greek song, adding together elements from the modernist and classical western tradition. He also experimented with the combination of tonal and atonal sounds and with morphological variation.

He was artistic director of the New Music Society and the Musical Analogion, whilst he also worked with and directed the Patras International Festival.

Politics
He was involved in Greece's political life since the 1960s. During the turbulent years of the Greek military junta of 1967–1974, he was persecuted by the regime for his anti-dictatorial activities and ideas. When the junta collapsed, he continued being actively involved in politics as a member of the maoist EKKE, especially in the first years after the restoration of democracy.

After the elections of October 1993, he was appointed as Deputy Minister of Culture by the new Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK) government, serving alongside the late Melina Mercouri who was Minister of Culture. He was appointed to Mercouri's position when she died in 1994, a position he kept until 1996.

He was a supporter of the Communist Party of Greece.

Works (selection)

 * Musical Act for Brecht for two male voices, two clarinets and a piano (text: Bertolt Brecht), 1972-78
 * Cantata for Makronisos for female and male voice, small orchestra and tape (text: Υannis Ritsos), 1976-82
 * Study for Vladimir Mayakovsky for voice and small orchestra (text: Vladimir Mayakovsky), 1976-82
 * Euripides IV for narrator, soprano, mezzo, tenor, baritone, bassoon, trumpet, horn and piano (text: Euripides), 1979
 * The Moonlight Sonata for voice and piano (text: Υannis Ritsos), 1979-81
 * Preludes for guitar, 1981
 * The Old Man of Alexandria, song cycle for voice, mandolin and piano (text: Konstantinos Kavafis), 1982
 * Opera for One (flutist) for flute, 1983-84
 * Duo for alto saxophone and electric bass, 1985
 * The Sea for string orchestra and trumpet, 1991
 * The Return of Helen, opera in one act in six movements based on a libretto by Christos Lambrakis (with poems by Yannis Ritsos) for nine voices, mixed choir, orchestra and a trio, 1992-93
 * Return to the Future 1 for clarinet and marimba, 2003
 * The sea smiles from over there for mezzo and string quartet (text: Federico García Lorca), 2009

title: Thanos Mikroutsikos


text:
Buteyko method

The Buteyko method or Buteyko breathing technique is a form of complementary or alternative physical therapy that proposes the use of breathing exercises primarily as a treatment for asthma and other respiratory conditions.

Buteyko asserts that numerous medical conditions, including asthma, are caused or exacerbated by chronically increased respiratory rate or hyperventilation. The method aims to correct hyperventilation and encourage shallower, slower breathing. Treatments include a series of reduced-breathing exercises that focus on nasal-breathing, breath-holding and relaxation.

Advocates of the Buteyko method claim that it can alleviate symptoms and reliance on medication for patients with asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and chronic hyperventilation. The medical community questions these claims, given limited and inadequate evidence supporting the theory and efficacy of the method.

History
The Buteyko method was originally developed in the 1950s by physiologist Konstantin Buteyko in the Soviet Union.

Buteyko was a Ukrainian psychologist, who moved to Russia in his 20s. He was born in Ukraine, and studied at Kyiv Polytechnic Institute.

The first official study into the effectiveness of the Buteyko method on asthma was undertaken in 1968 at the Leningrad Institute of Pulmonology. The second, held at the First Moscow Institute of Pediatric Diseases in April 1980, eventually led to the head of the ministry of health to issue an order (No 591) for the implementation of the Buteyko method in the treatment of bronchial asthma. Later, this method was introduced to Australia, New Zealand, Britain and the United States, where it has received increasing exposure. Anecdotal reports of life-changing improvements attributed to the Buteyko method abound on the Internet and in books.

The Buteyko method is one of a number of breathing retraining methods in use for treating lung diseases, including conventional techniques such as physiotherapist-led breathing exercises as well as alternative medicine techniques such as yoga.

In 2019, the popular Indonesian singer Andien posted images of herself, her husband and their two-year-old son with tape over their mouths on social media. The pictures prompted discussion and interest in the Buteyko method.

Method
The Buteyko method emphasizes the role of carbon dioxide and hyperventilation in respiratory diseases as well as overall health. It is known that hyperventilation can lead to low carbon dioxide levels in the blood (or hypocapnea), which can subsequently lead to disturbances of the acid-base balance in the blood and lower tissue oxygen levels. Advocates of this method assert that the effects of chronic hyperventilation have wider effects than is commonly accepted. These effects include widespread spasms of the muscle in the airways (bronchospasm), disturbance of cell energy production via the Krebs cycle, as well as disturbance of numerous vital homeostatic chemical reactions in the body. The Buteyko method purports to retrain the body's breathing pattern to correct for the presumed chronic hyperventilation and hypocapnia, thereby treating or curing the body of these medical problems.

The Buteyko method is not widely supported in the medical community, in part due to the lack of research supporting the theory that hyperventilation and hypocapnia causes disease, with one review noting the absence of convincing evidence to indicate that trying to change asthmatics' carbon dioxide level is either "desirable or achievable." Some studies that looked to corroborate the theory sought evidence such as by measuring the carbon dioxide levels in practitioners of Buteyko but failed to find conclusive support, leading some to propose alternate theoretical pathways for this method to improve symptoms.

Although variations exist among teachers of the technique in different countries, the main objective is "normalization" of breathing and the three core principles of Buteyko remain the same: nasal breathing, reduced breathing, and relaxation.

Nasal breathing
The Buteyko method emphasizes the importance of nasal breathing, which protects the airways by humidifying, warming, and cleaning the air entering the lungs. Many asthmatics have problems sleeping at night, and this is thought by Buteyko practitioners to be linked with poor posture and/or mouth breathing. By keeping the nose clear and encouraging nasal breathing during the day, night-time symptoms can also improve. Strictly nasal breathing during physical exercise is another key element of the Buteyko method.

Reduced breathing exercises
The core Buteyko exercises involve breath control: consciously reducing either breathing rate or breathing volume. Many teachers refer to Buteyko as 'breathing retraining' and compare the method to learning to ride a bicycle. They say that after adequate practice time, the techniques become instinctive and the exercises are gradually phased out as the condition improves.

Buteyko uses a measurement called the control pause (CP), the amount of time between breaths that an individual can comfortably hold breath. According to Buteyko teachers, people with asthma who regularly practice Buteyko breathing will notice an increase in CP and decrease in pulse rate that corresponds to decreased asthma symptoms.

Relaxation
Buteyko practice emphasizes relaxation to counter asthma attacks. The first feeling of an asthma attack is unsettling and can result in a short period of rapid breathing. Buteyko method claims that by controlling this initial over-breathing phase, asthmatics can prevent a "vicious circle of over-breathing" from developing and spiraling into an asthma attack.

Medical evidence
Advocates of the Buteyko method claim that it can treat a wide range of other diseases and symptoms (numbering up to 150), including diabetes. However, studies into the effectiveness of Buteyko have focused almost exclusively on asthma with a small amount of research on sleep apnea. Members of the medical community have been skeptical of the efficacy of Buteyko due to the often "exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims" earlier made by Buteyko practitioners.

There are few high quality studies such as randomized controlled trials looking at the efficacy of treating asthma with "breathing retraining" methods in general, which include the Buteyko method, yoga training and other relaxation techniques. Many of the studies that have evaluated breathing retraining have significant methodological flaws, including small sample sizes, possible patient selection bias as well as heterogeneity in design that makes coming to a firm conclusion difficult. These studies are also hampered by the difficulty in proper blinding and placebo control which could introduce more bias into these studies.

In 2015 the Australian Government's Department of Health published the results of a review of alternative therapies that sought to determine if any were suitable for being covered by health insurance; the Buteyko method was one of 17 therapies evaluated for which no clear evidence of effectiveness was found. A 2020 Cochrane review has found that breathing exercises may have some positive impact on quality of life, hyperventilation symptoms and lung function (moderate to very low certainty). A 2014 British clinical guideline said that for adults the Buteyko method could improve some asthma symptoms and quality of life, but that it had little impact on lung function.

title: Buteyko method