Talk:Titov Vrv

Cult of personality of Tito

The second source title is "Tito toponyms". The text follows: The cult status surrounding Josip Broz Tito, the onetime president of Yugoslavia, shows no sign of diminishing almost thirty years after his death...Most hikers bound for Titov Vrv and the Sar mountains set off from the old ski resort at Popova Sapka in Macedonia... etc. The context is clear: The cult status surrounding Josip Broz Tito is sill alive in North Macedonia and the name of this peak is directly related to this issue. Jingiby (talk) 09:04, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@Jingiby,

The text explicitly doesn't state anywhere that the cult of personality is alive in N.Macedonia.

I also severly doubt the reliablity of the source - it seems to me that it's a random blog/newsletter, and the authors have no visable qualifications. It seems more like some person's POV, rather than anything else.

Furthermore, you restored the third source - which is not related to the issue. Kluche (talk) 09:58, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

The third source confirms the cult of Tito's personality is alive even today in North Macedonia. This is indisputable. A lot of sources, including academic may be provided about this. Jingiby (talk) 10:02, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@Jingiby

The third source only mentions that he is viewed in a positive light. It is also an opinion article from a random news site.

Only the first source is a reliable academic source, the other two are not.

Lest we forget - this is about the peak, not Tito's personality cult.

The first source doesn't mention the peak.

The second source does mention the peak, but does not explicitly state about the personality cult in N.Macedonia. It is also of questionable reliability and quality.

The third source doesn't mention the peak nor the personality cult. It states that Tito is viewed in a positive light in N.Macedonia. It is also of questionable reliability and quality. Kluche (talk) 10:08, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

A few things stand out. This is not the original name of the peak. It bears the name of a communist dictator. Numerous sites in North Macedonia continue to bear this name. New monuments to Tito were erected in the country after the fall of communism. The original peak's name has not been restored. Sources support the thesis that the cult of Tito in some form is still alive in North Macedonia. There is also a source that links the persistence of this peak's name and the cult of Tito in the country. I do not agree with you.Jingiby (talk) 10:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Again, you have not addressed any of my concerns i.e the quality, relevance and reliability of the sources provided. I'd also like to address that this might be in conflict with WP:NOTEVERYTHING and WP:RSF. The article is, again, only about the peak, not the cult of personality. Kluche (talk) 11:00, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Then, to be objective, I suggest you specify that the name of the peak is the result of the cult of Tito's personality in Communist Yugoslavia. Let the text remains that its name has not been changed even after the declaration of independence of North Macedonia in 1991. These two facts are undeniable. Jingiby (talk) 18:02, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

I don't get any hits for Titov Vrv in The Curtain Rises or the Global Voices article. hidden Europe is a travel blog. Thus, they all have no purpose on this article. --Local hero ^talk 20:16, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Please, do not delete sourced content. By the way, Hidden Europe is an online magazine, based in Berlin, and nothing was falsified.Jingiby (talk) 05:49, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

You had no valid support that *the name of the peak remains unchanged because of Tito's cult of personality*, falsely insisting your sources backed the claim. That's what happened here.

I'm sure you're not continuing to suggest that a short travel article written by one or two travel writers provides a sufficient evaluation of whether the unchanged name of this peak constitutes a continued cult of personality of Tito in Macedonia, right? I've seen you dismiss the most in-depth book ever written about Cincinnati chili, yet here "hidden Europe" (based in Berlin, as if that matters) is high-quality. Got it. --Local hero ^talk 06:38, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

What in fact a reliable source claims on this story is that in Macedonia it was simply not possible to do away completely with the Socialist narrative about Tito, as communist Yugoslavia had given birth to the Macedonian nation and in Macedonian history textbooks we still find the most positive evaluations of the Socialist system and Tito in particular; for more see: Tamara Trošt, The Image of Josip Broz Tito in Post-Yugoslavia: Between National and Local Memory in Ruler Personality Cults from Empires to Nation-States and Beyond, 2020, Routledge. DOI https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429275432 Jingiby (talk) 11:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

@Jingiby, you pushed a completly unreliable and irrelevant POV source. You have now replaced it with a slightly more credible one however I have reviewed many Wikipedia pages of places named (or once named) after communists and/or socalists, including places mentioned in the source (like Užice, Saint Petersburg, Volgograd, Nizhny Novgorod, Koprinka resevoir, Kumrovec, Lenin Peak, Pobeda Peak, Podgorica, Velenje, Drvar, Donetsk, Luhansk and many more) which omit any mention of a personality cult. Furthermore the excerpt of the source you linked in your latest comment does not mention any personality cult. To me, this addition also goes against WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Best regards. Kluche (talk) 20:41, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I think the source I have added meets all the criteria of Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (history). Slightly more credible is merely a POV. Otherwise, the discussion starts to look more and more like Wikipedia:I just don't like it. Jingiby (talk) 06:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Jingiby, you did not adress any of the other concerns or facts that I brought up, nor WP:NOTEVERYTHING. You are also the only editor who is pushing for this addition. Furthermore, in the provided excerpt of the source, you have also, in my opinion, manipulated the source - in regards to Titov Vrv, the source only states that it's "regarded as suitable for naming after famous, ideologically preferred persons, important events or ideological values," not the personality cult. Kluche (talk) 07:56, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I am. Jingiby (talk) 09:05, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Jingiby, you have again, not addressed any of my concerns during this discussion - such as [1], [2] and [3]. You also continued to push a questionable and unreliable source once Local hero voiced his concern [4] (and related diffs). This seems to me that it's very unconstructive, and I have provided evidence in the form of diffs. Kluche (talk) 10:20, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Hey, I don't see a specific proposal from you on the text of the article, only comments on my comments. Jingiby (talk) 10:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

I made my proposition clear - the personality cult addition is not needed per WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Furthermore, there is a link to Tito's Wikipedia page, which has statements regarding his personality cult. You have, again, failed to address my concerns. Kluche (talk) 10:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Ok, but the academic source that explains what it is about is desirable to remain at the end of the sentence. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 10:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

@Jingiby, You didn't address the fact that no personality cult is mentioned in the excerpt mentioning Titov Vrv. Kluche (talk) 20:46, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

I think that a scientific publication should be interpreted in its entirety, not by individual sentences. It seems to me that the way you understand this post is not quite precise. In my view, your opinion does not correspond to the idea of the author of the article. It is obvious to me the fact that Tito's personality cult is mentioned in relation of mentioning the Titov Vrv and all other objects in Communist Yugoslavia named after this dictator and mentoned there. Jingiby (talk) 20:53, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

In fact, the Macedonian historian Professor Dragica Popovska is of the same opinion. In the article "Politics of Conceptualization of Space in Macedonia during Yugoslav socialism", in "History", Association of the historians of the Republic of Macedonia, year LV, no. 2, Skopje, 2020, pp. 115-126 she claims: In this one context, one of the main markers of the identity of the new Yugoslav state is the personality of its president and leader – Josip Broz Tito. The character of Tito, with the creation of his cult after the war, becomes an ideological symbol which finds its place in the wider official discourse of Yugoslavia, including its incorporation into public space. How significant this symbol was in Macedonia at that specific time is also shown by the decision to rename it of the city of Veles, which in 1946 with a special law passed in the Assembly of The Republic of Macedonia becomes - Titov Veles.This practice was also applied to mountain topography when the Parliament of the Republic of Macedonia adopted in 1953 decision to name the highest peak of Shar Mountain as: Titov Vrv. Jingiby (talk) 21:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps you'll try to make the argument that Veles dropping "Titov" after independence is evidence of the end of his cult of personality in Macedonia... We could easily settle this by linking to the existing article which lists places named after Tito, which explains the cult of personality in the lead. --Local hero ^talk 01:01, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Ok. Jingiby (talk) 04:44, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

I agree with this solution. Kluche (talk) 06:57, 30 November 2022 (UTC)