Talk:Hristo Botev
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] neutrality tag
i ve put a neutrality tag at the april uprising section- the reason is that IMO it is in favour of the bulgarian side and against the ottoman one. --Greece666 12:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Even Turkey admits the facts
Hey Greek, if Turkey admits the facts about the cruelties of the bashi-bozouk in putting down the April 1876 uprising, why are you defending them so much? By the way, modern Turkey is as related to the Ottoman Empire as Greece is to the Byzantine Empire.
No, Sorry, I will remove this neutrality question-mark. The article is not perfect, it is too pathetic, rather literary than scientific, and looks like being copied from a textbook from the time I went to school (the 80-es). The most stupid argument, however, is that it is anti-Turkish! What should a neutral article about Sándor Petőfi look like? Hristo Botev is a Bulgarian national hero, first and before all, because he was a great poet, not a great military commander, his poems were superb, while his attempt to fight for his country's freedom ended tragically! How can one be neutral when speaking about Hristo Botev, Petőfi, José de San Martín, Bolívar? Well, certainly the article about Jean of Arc is not neutral and defends the French side! I'll go and put a neutrality tag, right now! But the British themselves will say "Hey, stop"!
Is the use of a lifeless and mindless 'language du bois', so common today, the right way to be neutral? What is a neutral article about the slaughters in Smyrna? Or about the German genocide against the Jews? Or about the 1848 Hungarian Revolution? Shall I go on? The Greek Army's role in Macedonia from 1913 to 1920 (one of Greece's greatest national leaders, Metaxas, supported or better say, ordered the genocide against Bulgarians). I know, the Bulgarian Army was not better when it had revenge over the Greek population in the two World Wars (e.g. the 1941 burning of Serres). Trying to be neutral should not mean changing the nature of things. Still, as I said, in the case of Turkey and Bulgaria [I heard, not in the case of Greece and Armenia, strange, why?] Turkey accepts rather normally Bulgaria's view on the facts from the Ottoman rule, which, as we know, were not always positive, but are no longer (after 1990) used for anti-Turkish propaganda. Here is an example. Turkish ambassadors regularly assist the ceremonial raising of the national flag on March 3rd, Bulgaria's national day. This is the date of the signing of the San Stefano Treaty in 1878, that is, of the Ottoman Empire's defeat and the restoration of Bulgarian state after 482 years.
There is a saying in Bulgarian: "Don't be a bigger catholic than the pope", maybe there is something similar in Greek. Sorry, I don't have a log-in, 34 yo from Bulgaria, ethnic Bulgarian, Orthodox Christian 85.11.148.77 20:17, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I have removed it. You can put it back again if you insist. Well, from a Turk I can accept to question the neutrality of the article (I would rather question its quality), but, sorry, not from a Greek. And if you care to learn more about how the April Uprising was put down, read the contemporary British press from that time. The cruelties and the slaughters during and after the uprising and the lack of political will by the Sultan to introduce changes gave Russia the formal reason to start the 1877-78 war.
- Nonsense. Neutrality is necessary everywhere, and Jeanne d'Arc is subject to neutrality requirements as much as any other article. There's a WP:NPOV policy and all that. Signed: 24-year-old from Bulgaria, ethnic Bulgarian, atheist, supportive of freedom and opposed to nationalism. --194.145.161.227 23:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] What is wrong with the neutrality now? The article is not full
but the tone is balanced.!
It would seem that any flaws in the article stem not from political bias, but from the use of somewhat florid language in describing Mr Botev's achievements.
Nope, the tone ain't balanced. The language of the whole thing betrays an obvious nationalism and romanticism on the part of the author. I'll try and rewrite most of it, keeping the info but switching to a neutral tone. —Nicholai 20:57, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Citations added
Well, I think the citations I provided would solve the "POV"-problem. To anyone who needs an objective and non-POV-information, I will recommend the Encyclopaedia Britannica. Despite that, the excerpt of William Gladstone's pamphlet and the Oscar Wilde's poem give quite a picture.
[edit] Spelling of "Ботйов"
The contemporary spelling is "Ботьов" — the letter ь must be used after consonants instead of й (both pronounced [j]). Is the name in the article some kind of an archaic spelling, or is it a mistake? --Cameltrader 10:55, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- You are right that the modern spelling would be "Ботьов" but that is irrelevant because "Ботйов" was the original form he used himself. I see no point in modernizing the name that is mentioned only once in the article (so I am reverting the recent edit). In any case, the name has become universally established in yet another form: "Ботев". Apcbg 07:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Still a lot of problems
The tone is still inappropriately emotional. Nearly all the info about the April uprising (besides still reeking of POV) is redundant, because we have a separate article about it. Don't feel like dealing with it right now, but there's work to be done here. --194.145.161.227 23:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
