Talk:Ljubčo Georgievski/Archive 1

Untitled

The youngest Prime Minister. Milo Djukanovic was just 29 when becoming Prime Minister of what was still a functional Yugoslavia in 1991. Ragusan 15 july 06

hmm it depends on the Guiness book of records: do they mean "the youngest Prime minister" (just generaly) or do they mean "the youngest Prime minister of a SOVEREIGN INDEPENDENT STATE". When Milo became a prtime minister of Montenegro, the country was a federal republic within Yugoslavia, not an independent state. Yugoslavia as we know had a federal government AND governments of the federal republics. basically it does seem u r right but I dunno --Vbb-sk-mk 20:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Funny Citizenship Change

It is amazing that a politician would change his nationality just like that. I am curious to know why he did it. Are there any interviews with him about the Bulgarian citizenship? --Cryout 11:45, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Is having Bulgarian nationality mutually exclusive with having Macedonian nationality? He probably did it because Bulgaria is joining the EU next year, for easier travel within the EU and probably dealing with money is easier in the EU if you are an EU citizen. Apparently the restrictions are almost non-existant. - FrancisTyers · 22:47, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

On the contrary, Bulgarian and Macedonian nationalities are as near as any. I guess I should have used "citizenship" as a word, because I guess Mr Georgievski will still choose "Macedonian" as his nationality. The really interested thing is not that a Macedonian want to be Bulgarian; the uniqueness is in that he is a politician. And I believe politicians have a certain responsibility to their own people to kind of respect their country. Also, how come a recent ex-prime-minister has problems travelling across Europe? What rights will a Bulgarian Mr. Georgievski have that won't be given to the Macedonian Prime Minister? Is paying for a EU visa really so expensive for Mr Georvski? --Cryout 23:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

This article is an example of biased statements concerning living persons. The statements given in the papers cited in this article were demented by Ljubcho Georgievski, as well as by the spokesman of its political party - VMRO-People's Party. There are many important issues that were obviously not put intentionally into the article, such as: - Ljubcho Georgievski is the first to appealed for independence of Macedonia; - He created the first powerful non-communist party in Macedonia; - He composed the first government with new political democratic forces in 1998 etc. Therefore, this article made obviously by some political opponents of the biggest politician in newest Macedonian history present an example of the abuse of free media as is Wikipedia. It would be the best for the authors to retract this rather badly made article and leave somebody else who is more objective to create another one. Personally, the presence of such an article in Wikipedia made me strongly reserved about the entire content of the site I loved very much before. Previously I identified some errors in WIkipedia articles, but I thought that they were unintentional. This time I see that some persons can easily use this site in order to place "constructed truth" that is afterward protected and impossible to correct, thus making the content of the otherwise enthusiastic project practically unusable.

Yes yes, so cite sources where Lyubcho and his party deny his citizenship, as well as cite sources that the Bulgarian president's office is lying.   /FunkyFly.talk_  16:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

And consider updating the article with the facts you've mentioned here while providing references, instead of complaining. Todor→Bozhinov 17:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

The authors obviously do not understand what does the word "reference" means. Especially when talking about a serious reference. A statement in a newspaper denied in another media is far away to be a fact. But, this is only a minor error. To be an author is a responsible task and those who are not able to respond to it have to be enough fair to abandon such atempts. This article can not be improved, because it is biased since its conception. The author has to be honest with the international e-comunity and retract this very badly made article by himself in order to do not make harm to the reputation of Wikipedia. I could make exceptionally exhausting document on Ljubcho Georgievski, but I find that there are specialists of much higher level that have to create it, and I am waiting for them to succeed. Formally speaking, this article violates the fundamental Wikipedia NPOV (Neutral Point of View) principle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view), particularly required in the case of negative material on living persons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons).

You're abusing me, my country and my nation if you're calling being Bulgarian "negative material". And I don't see anything biased here — the sources are clear and I'm not aware of any denial (are you implying our President's Office is lying or what?). Still, you're missing the very concept of Wikipedia — no one "owns" articles and no one is an article's sole author, this is a collaborative project; thus speaking, if you're dissatisfied with the article, be bold and improve it or even rewrite it from scratch! You shouldn't wait for the specialists (isn't this a very bad excuse), just roll up your sleeves and contribute! Todor→Bozhinov 20:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

A little grammar lesson for the anonymous user “demented” cannot be used in the way it is used in the first posting, an appropriate word is denounced. Nevertheless some of the articles on Wikipedia are not up to par grammatically. Furthermore if the anonymous user can provide links to the articles where Georgievski “denounces” his evident addition to his citizenship status by all means provide them, do not complain, add to the article obviously you do not have trouble editing pages otherwise we would not be looking at this posting. naso84 30 August 2006

Repeating a statement denied by the concerned person is a negative material as is and has nothing to do with any country or nation, particularly because this issue was raised and abused for political purposes in the period of composition of the new government coalition. Once the information placed in media is denied by the concerned person, it is no more usable. Who is lying: Georgievski or the Bulgarian Presidential Office, I can not speculate. The only way to resolve the question about who is lying is to start a convenient juridical procedure. Until the final verdict, nobody can be considered guilty. On 2 August (Ilinden) I added this: "The above information was denied by Ljubcho Georgievski in his statement for the TV Kanal 5". Todor Bozhinov acted as a censor by requiring a reference and subsequently erasing the statement. That way he took him a role of owner . It is still not too late for him to abandon the attempts to "create" the biographical data for Georgievski. Make such an article for the Bulgarian President's Office Official Gazette, not for Wikipedia. Here only well established relevant information is needed, and not disputed one used in the modeling of the public opinion for current political purposes.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.149.146.222 (talk • contribs)

Oh so, removal of unsourced information is censorship? You've come to the wrong site.   /FunkyFly.talk_  08:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Exactly! The "censor" required an appropriate referencing (TV 5 - is not enough for him, only the reports of the Bulgarian President's Office can count as valid). Besides, are you playing a tribunal proceeding the case of Georgievski and his Party? When speaking about national dignity - I respect my former Prime Minister and I believe to his words. Putting him the words and actions he denies, is an insult for me. I apologize to those who made the first versions of the article that were quite good and fair. My objections concern those introducing later the negative material.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.149.146.222 (talk • contribs)

You dont seem to understand that the TV network you cite later withdrew its report, and it is now generally accepted that Lyubcho did indeed obtain Bulgarian citizenship. Obviously you cannot back your statement with information withdrawn from the network itself. Also labelling reports of Bulgarian citizenship as "negative material" shows your bias very clearly.   /FunkyFly.talk_  08:57, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

The one who removes unsourced material doesn't need referencing — the one who inserts it does. Besides, I don't think you can compare any media with a national institution like the President's Office. Our Vice President has signed the decree and no media can deny this... especially a Macedonian one, I fear. And please don't call me a censor, I consider this a plain personal attack and it has nothing to do with the reality. Todor→Bozhinov 10:06, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

To user 194.149.146.222 I do not see how the citizenship status of Georgievski is of any political interest on Wikipedia after all it is a site for providing unbiased information, and Mr. Georgievski did recieve Bulgarian citizenship as confirmed from the office of the Bulgarian president. And since we are on the note of citizenship status of Macedonian politicians I do not know how many of them hold either Albanian or Serbian citizenship but I could guess quite a few so do not attack an article that just provides an obvious fact that Mr Georgievski has a dual citizenship. naso84 31 August 2006

You confirm what Georgievski said: "This is a political/police construction". We saw hundreds of similar attacks on Georgievski. Your sources are media informations denied by the concerned person and political party. Database record (register) could be a proper source. The sentence in the discussion: “Our Vice President has signed the decree and no media can deny this... especially a Macedonian one...” explains everything.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.149.146.222 (talk • contribs)

You can blurb all you want about denials and proofs, with no sourcing there's little you can do to change the article.   /FunkyFly.talk_  09:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

What's the problem with my sentence? By the way, here's President.bg confirming this. This is an interview on the official website of the Bulgarian President and Vice President, during which Angel Marin (the Vice President) confirmed that Georgievski has Bulgarian citizenship. It's quite doubtful you can deny that. Todor→Bozhinov 10:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that it is a biography of a living person, followed by more than 100.000 living Macedonians. His statements must be taken seriously, especially when making a biographical article. I repeat, the references cited in the extension of the article is (denied) journal information and not official records or results of an already done research.

"Followed"? Ivan Kostov or Volen Siderov may be "followed" by several times more living and undead Bulgarians, but I wouldn't ever take them seriously — they're politicians. As for the "denied" information and the lack of official records — I already posted a link to the official website of the President of Bulgaria, where this is confirmed by the Vice President personally, who has signed the decree, again, personally. If that's not official and undeniable than nothing could ever be. Todor→Bozhinov 15:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I still don't see why the Macedonians are making such a big deal about a former prime minister becoming a citizen of another country? I mean he is not a prime minister anymore, and if it such a problem after his mandate expires do NOT re-elect him. Let it go or continue living in your denial which ever. naso84 1 September 2006

I do not discuss the issue of being Bulgarian citizen, but the issue of giving statements concerning a living person that he denied. This is a sensitive political issue and has nothing to do with the biography like this in Wikipedia. Everybody can discuss it in political magazines, but Wikipedia requires something more educative. This addition to the article do not improve or enrich it, but, unfortunately, introduces negative material in the sense of the well known negative energy between Bulgaria and Macedonia, between communists and non-communists in Macedonia etc. Concerning the statements of Bulgarian officials (above mentioned private communication of one of the contributors), it creates additional problems. Namely, no other information on Bulgarian citizenship for other Macedonian citizens was given by any Bulgarian official, even on explicit demand of the media, under explanation that the personal data can not be made public. This complicates additionally the case of Georgievski discussed above.

Well now as far as I remember the case was blown open by Trud so unless the Bulgarian government starts censoring the media this type of cases are going to continue to emerge. And on the point that he denied, well he is an elected official of course he is going to say he is not, I mean it is a controversial issue. I do not think the Bulgarian president's office intentionally released the information. If there is any factual proof otherwise make it available. And these types of cases have happened in Bulgaria, George Ganchev was an American citizen when he was serving in the Parliament and when that particular fact emerged he was forced to resign, so my point is don't deny something that has happened if it has verifiable proof. naso84 2 September 2006

Wikipedia articel is not for research, political or juridical activities. Only established relevant information is required. If Gerogievski loses his mandate, that would be something to note. Otherwise, we have an ongoing research.

The same thing again Mr. Georgievski should not be a target of such an extensive discussion considering the article is not that big. It has been confirmed from the highest and utmost authority in Bulgaria he has received citizenship, so drop the constant posting of derogatory remarks towards the links and information posted and instead expand the article with some background information on the person in question. Oh and by the way his name is Georgievski not Gerogievski and article is surely different from articel. naso84 4 September 2006

Thank you very much for identifying misprints in the discussion, which I corrected subsequently. To return to the very beginning of this discussion, I remind you that while putting such questionable negative material in Wikipedia one decreases the confidence in it. Once I conclude that it is easy to abuse it for purposes different than the declared ones, I will hesitate to use other resources in it as serious references, since it is possible that they have similar shortcomings. I know many pages abused for influencing public opinion instead of providing sources of knowledge; I treat them with attention and point it out to other persons. Finally, thank you very much for the positions exposed during this discussion, because they made me aware on some political realities that I previously ignored (“There is no negative outcome of an experiment; it as always a new knowledge.”).

Bulgarian citizenship = "Subjective negative material"?? Really neutral of you.   /FunkyFly.talk_  21:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)