Talk:Pitu Guli
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Bulgaria, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Bulgaria-related topics. Please visit the project page if you would like to participate. Happy editing! | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. | |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. | |
 |
To-do list for Pitu Guli: | edit · history · watch · refresh |
|---|---|---|
|
No to-do list assigned; you can help us in improving the articles in the same category |
||
Does being an ethnic albanian stop him being Macedonian [1]? He could be a Vlachophone Macedonian, just like Ioannis Kolettis, a Greek Prime Minister, was a Vlachophone (i.e. bilingual) Greek, not an ethnic Aromanian. --Telex 22:03, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- Pitu Guli was an ethnic albanian from Macedonia, nor ethnic Macedonian nor ethnic Bulgarian. So, stop writing about him as beeing kinda weird mixed ethnicity Bulgarian-Macedonian. He's an albanian (illyrian) like me.
You people are idiots. He was an ethnic Aromanian. He fought for Macedonia (which was allied with Bulgaria) for independence of Macedonia from Ottoman Turkey. He was not ethnic Macedonian but was still more of a Macedonian than those traitors who gave information to the Turks and made the Ilinden uprising useless. Why would an ethnic Macedonian speak Aromanian? And as if he was Illyrian. The Aromanians have nothing to do with Illyrians. Albania (The Illyrians) were on Turkey's side. They converted to Islam and oppressed Aromanians. If Pitu Guli had the chance he would have attacked Albania.
[edit] Source-less
There aren't any neutral or original sources that BMARC was certainly in use before 1898. There aren't any neutral or original sources that the BMARC statute was used in a significant period of time. There aren't any neutral or original sources that it is possible that BMARC statute was in use after 1898. The "parallel statutes" theory is not supported by any sources (neutral or not). It is supported only by FunkyFly, as far as I know. And rightly so, because it's wierd to have two operating statutes contradicting themselves - one accepting only Bulgarians, and the other accepting Aromanians (such as Pitu Guli), as well. But Funky has answers for all - since the name of the organization was certainly BMARC before 1902 [citation needed], all members, even Pitu Guli, are Bulgarians. --FlavrSavr 02:38, 8 July 2006 (UTC) Fravr: The Bulgarian point is that Macedonian meant a person living in the area of Macedonia considered as a gegraphical area. It included Bulgarians (Tatarchev, Sarafov, Krustyo Asenov, Goce Delchev, Dame Gruev) as well as other nationalities. It was the idea of Goce Delchev which he took from Vasil Levski. The 1903 revolutionaries followed the example of the Levski and the rebels of 1875 and 1876. Unfortunately, except for some Aromanians no other natiionality followed the call of Goce Delchev. Instead both the Greek andartes and the Serb chetniks tried to suppress the remnants of VMRO commiting much more atrocities than the Turks. You accuse the Bulgarians as occupiers yet there is no word said about the period 1918-1940 during the Skopie jupanschtina. Dou you really think that the Serbs behaved more civilized then than they did in the 1990s? You just have to ask yourselves questions contrary to the view you have already assumed so as to find the truth.
