Talk:IMRO – Bulgarian National Movement

Changes

Hello Footballer99. I reverted your changes twice now because they do not appear constructive and justified to me. You need consensus. The abbreviation "IMRO" and the other abbreviations have been applied to the party. I see no reason to remove notable political stances either. One sentence in the lead is not even enough. To be honest, the lead may be even too short. It wouldn't hurt to have a slight expansion. StephenMacky1 (talk) 12:12, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the basis on which you added IMRO again is not supported by the facts. Even though VMRO is using the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization's abbreviation in its name, the party is and has always been a separate entity from the historic IMRO, which no longer exists.

In addition, I do not see a reason why you had to rewrite almost the entire article other than to inject your personal bias. Reading your version, it sounds less encyclopegic and more like and article written by a member of one of those minority groups who are allegedly being discriminated by the party's policies.

If you keep doing this, you risk your reputation as an objective Wikipedia contributor and you will eventually force me to take the issue to Wikipedia administrators higher up.

Footballer99 (talk) 07:14, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

Go ahead and take it up with the administrators then if you can prove that I am violating any policies. I did not know that depicting the party as it is depicted in WP:RS is injecting my "personal bias". Would you rather have us whitewash? Also, no one is claiming that this party is the same entity as the historical IMRO, just that sometimes its name is abbreviated simply as IMRO/VMRO too. It's nothing deep. StephenMacky1 (talk) 09:23, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

Text-source integrity

VB3wiki, your edit does not comply with text-source integrity and introduces WP:SYNTH. It is important that the content should reflect what the sources say, rather than inserting our own interpretations. StephenMacky1 (talk) 13:26, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

An example is where you mentioned "conservative", despite the sources primarily describing the party as nationalist and populist, and removing "extreme pro-Orthodox stance" as per source. StephenMacky1 (talk) 13:30, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

One of the original source mentions the party describing itself as conservative. I was working on this edit over 2 days due to interruptions and I may have accidentally left it out. I will look at it again later and fix it. VB3wiki (talk) 15:01, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, it has and it is already mentioned in the section. However, we go by what secondary sources describe it as, rather than simply going by what the party describes itself as. You can freely propose a rewording, as long as it complies with the sources. StephenMacky1 (talk) 16:39, 24 April 2026 (UTC)