This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This map shows a country that does not exist - its borders are wrong, taking land from Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia and Albania. Looks like propaganda. 93.42.67.8118:20, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Image is heavily used on Wikipedia. It looks like a 'Greater Macedonia' map where the Macedonians place claims on Greece and even southwest Bulgaria. It is historically inaccurate and is likely propaganda....but this is not a legitimate reason for deletion. It is a derivative image from a map with OK copyright. I don't know if it should be deleted but it doesn't pass the 'smell' test and would be like a map showing China with Taiwan within its borders...or Argentina with the Falklands in its borders. I will ask a few Admins on this map...as I don't know how to vote. --Leoboudv (talk) 01:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No problem with copyright, but it is out of scope. Commons can't be a vehicle for contemporary political propaganda projects. M.Lahanas (talk) 05:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It shows Macedonia as a geographical region, in its conventional modern definition, a legitimate encyclopedic topic covered by separate articles and similar maps in all projects. While it is certainly true that this geographical unit is associated with political irridentist ideologies, and I have no doubt its coverage on the mk-wiki will not be free from such POVs, that is not a reason for deletion. I don't particularly like the design of the map – the garish choice of colours does indeed highlight the geographical delimitation of the supposed region, at the expense of the political borders, to an extent that it may suggest it shows a country of its own, but ostensibly the scope of the map is a legitimate one, showing the geographical delimitation in relation to the existing borders. Factually I have not seen any serious inaccuracies. Fut.Perf.☼06:35, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There are many maps of the "geographical region" to be found over the commons... but that ain't one of them. Since it bears the colours of the coat of arms of FYROM, uses slavo-macedonian alphabet and was uploaded by a user named "macedonianboy" it can be easily described as a propaganda-masterpiece. --Knop92 (talk) 09:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: the name of the uploader is no argument whatsoever, and the use of Macedonian Cyrillic is simply due to the fact it's designed for use on the Macedonian Wikipedia. How else would you want them to write things there? Fut.Perf.☼12:35, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:This argument works either way: how else would I expect it to be written since it's propaganda? Things found in the commons are translated and then uploaded in other wikipedias. By the way, wouldn't I be subjective in case I was using a nickname like "kill all jews" and then get involved with articles concerning the holocaust? Just a making a point there ... --Knop92 (talk) 14:03, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also the labels on the map (Вардарска Македоија / Пиринска Македоија / Езеска Македоија) are the usual propaganda terms and do not correspond to historical subdivisions of the area. M.Lahanas (talk) 14:23, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It is clearly propaganda. Keeping it or not depends on whether it's useful to have propaganda pictures. Such as having Swastika pictures. It can be useful occasionally. --AaThinker (talk) 18:32, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very much in use, therefore useful, therefore in scope. The only issue that could justify its removal would be whether it was a fake: as it's claims are clearly attributed to a POV (its clearly a propaganda image) there's no problem there. The Wikipedias need to illustrate different points of view. If the suitabitlty of one image or another is a point of debate in the Wikipedia, its not up to us to decide the matter by deleting the image. --Simonxag (talk) 10:53, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, thanks for the pointer. "Images having particular national, political or religious significance including flags, emblems and maps can arouse strong passions, but Commons is not the place to decide which of various competing versions is the correct or official version. If you feel strongly that a map, emblem, flag or other file hosted here is “wrong” in some way please try to persuade your local wiki community to make use of the version you prefer instead." – But anyway, how would this map violate neutrality in the first place? People still seem to be uncritically falling for the Greek national posture of offendedness here. Can somebody explain what's wrong about the map? Several Greek authors have seriously suggested it's wrong because it uses Macedonian names and writing for placenames in Greece and Bulgaria? I mean, come on, d'oh. I do hope everybody else can see that argument for the nonsense it is. What else should it use, Chinese? Apart from that, what else is wrong? It presents the geographical boundaries of a geographical region. The existence of that region, under the name name Macedonia and in these boundaries, is not in doubt. If this map is illegitimate, then so is en:File:Macedonia (disambiguation).png, File:Macedonia overview.svg, File:Greater Macedonia.png, File:Europe Balkans Macedonia geo.jpg. Fut.Perf.☼05:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point is that these arguments are not for the Commons, which is why they should not be settled by image deletion. --Simonxag (talk) 13:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Come on guys this map is totaly wrong and it's a bad propaganda. As you can see most of Macedonia is Greek ! So why not to write them in Greek ? Or at least write the name of every city and area at the language of the country it lies in . When macedonia was a real country with Alexander the Great before thousands of years they used the Greek language . If you want a useful and historically good map write them in Greek ! ! ! Now it's a propaganda ... GreekAlexander (talk) 14:59, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
strong deletion Though I'm very carefull when dealing with greek agenda or propaganda, I must say that this map is the worst kind of FYROM propaganda. Map mania has always been politics. Do not adopt it here pls. The same for the following file--ΗΠΣΤΓ (talk) 15:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading this one. It is now possible to show in the English version that is is full with weasel words. Namely the words "ethinc", "Pirin Macedonia", "Aegean Macedonia" and "Vardar Macedonia" have no actual historical or geographical significance, they are propaganda terms. I indicated these words in the Bulgarian language map earlier. M.Lahanas (talk) 19:43, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There is unfortunately some canvassing going on at the Greek wikipedia (here), which explains the sudden influx of voters from that wiki, who are evidently following a national agenda here. Note that every single "delete" contribution so far has been from an el-wiki contributor, most of them with little to know experience with Commons policies. Not surprisingly, none of them addresses the policy issue rightly pointed out by Simonxag above. Fut.Perf.☼05:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, it's more than obvious. (The usernames themselves give them away.) Anyway, we don't count votes. Every admin already knows the outcome of this, we just like to give people their say otherwise they'll feel like they didn't get a chance to explain their side. The image is in use, has no copyright problems, and is lawful for us to host, why would we ever delete it? Rocket000 (talk) 05:46, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You must worry especially when you are becoming instruments of any national agenda including Greek. And ofcource you are manipulating content when you leave the following aside: However, neutrality of description should be aimed at wherever possible, and in any event neither filenames nor text may be phrased in such a way as to constitute vandalism, attack or deliberate provocation. And a piece of advice. Learn Greek before talking about deliberate canvassing--ΗΠΣΤΓ (talk) 10:19, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Every admin already knows the outcome of this, we just like to give people their say otherwise they'll feel like they didn't get a chance to explain their side. Then we must suppose that here, in commons, since every admin knows the outcome, the whole situation is a simple joke against wikipedians--ΗΠΣΤΓ (talk) 07:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]
It says "neutrality of description" So fix the description if it's wrong. We don't delete files because someone incorrectly described it. Do you delete articles because they contain wrong info? No, you fix it. It's not a joke against Wikipedians, they are the reason we're keeping this image. If they didn't want to use it, we could delete based on the simple fact that we don't like it (consensus). (BTW, manipulating content is perfectly ok; this is a wiki.) As for the neutrality we strive for here on Commons, it's a little different than what you might be used to. For example, your comment implies there's something wrong with propaganda. Sure most people would agree, but that is taking a non-neutral POV. We have tons of images that could and have been used for propaganda. It's all about how you use it, not that it exists. An image by itself is just an image. It's the context you give it that makes you right or wrong. I don't need to know Greek, to know that many of these voters are being influenced by something... they're not Commons regulars and obviously are involving politics / personal beliefs. Rocket000 (talk) 00:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Μost of them with little to know experience with Commons policies: And some others should be more careful when characterize people. I believe that Commons is not a means for propaganda and a map that deceives the entire world - thus it is offensive-, as this is the internationally-recognized border:
(this map) has nothing to do with geographical and encyclopaedical content. It serves nothing regarding the aims of Commons and it should have been deleted even without request. --Lemur12 (talk) 01:40, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The map does not show Macedonia as a geographical region, this is clearly propaganda. If it was a geographical region, why changing all the names into cyrillic? Wikipedia and Commons are not blogs, neither State-controlled organisms of post-communist countries. It is not NPOV.--The daydreamer (talk) 06:34, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am not familiar with Commons policies but, the more I read, the more I see that Commons does not require npov. This is NOT wikipedia, that is plain clear. Fellow Greek editors should care for the unfair usage of this map in WP, not for its mere existence. I would even vote for keeping if a) vote would mean anything here, b) some aesthetic improvement would be made (such as the irritating red color)--194.24.171.19611:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Although it may be used as propaganda, it presents an objective concept: the geographic region of Macedonia. Commons is used by all Wikipedias, not just by the ones using Latin script. Deleting this would make it harder for the readers whose native language uses Cyrillics (the file is currently used for the WP in Ukrainian, Serbian, and Macedonian) to understand the articles discussing the concept.Anonimu (talk) 23:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The map is fraught with political propaganda and although it claims to represent current state of affairs, it uses intentionally the obsolete Turkish name of modern Blagoevgrad. It has not been used since 1950. Bogorm (talk) 07:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Skopje never was in Macedonia. Skopje was Dardanian city in ancient times. During Ottoman times it was in Kossovo's vilaet. Then it was in Vardarska Banovina and, ONLY after Tito renamed that region in "Socialista Federativa Republika Makedonija", Skopje was in some "Macedonia". Similarly, Veles (ancient Vylazora) was capital of Peonia, that is out of Macedonia. Only Pelagonia, the southern part of modern FYROM was part of historic and geographic Macedonia. Istoor
Comment: Image is heavily used on Wikipedia. It looks like a 'Greater Macedonia' map where the Macedonians place claims on Greece and even southwest Bulgaria. It is historically inaccurate and is likely propaganda....but this is not a legitimate reason for deletion. It is a derivative image from a map with OK copyright. I don't know if it should be deleted but it doesn't pass the 'smell' test and would be like a map showing China with Taiwan within its borders...or Argentina with the Falklands in its borders. I will ask a few Admins on this map...as I don't know how to vote. --Leoboudv (talk) 01:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Delete No problem with copyright, but it is out of scope. Commons can't be a vehicle for contemporary political propaganda projects. M.Lahanas (talk) 05:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Keep It shows Macedonia as a geographical region, in its conventional modern definition, a legitimate encyclopedic topic covered by separate articles and similar maps in all projects. While it is certainly true that this geographical unit is associated with political irridentist ideologies, and I have no doubt its coverage on the mk-wiki will not be free from such POVs, that is not a reason for deletion. I don't particularly like the design of the map – the garish choice of colours does indeed highlight the geographical delimitation of the supposed region, at the expense of the political borders, to an extent that it may suggest it shows a country of its own, but ostensibly the scope of the map is a legitimate one, showing the geographical delimitation in relation to the existing borders. Factually I have not seen any serious inaccuracies. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:35, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
20:48, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
