Talk:Bulgarian unification

Untitled
According to R.J. Crampton's A concise history of Bulgaria the coup d'etat took place on September 18, not September 5. The discrepancy is because of the difference between the Julian and the Gregorian calendar, Bulgaria didn't change until 1916; March 31, 1916 was followed by April 14, 1916. Thuresson 00:37, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * So we should move all the dates to the Julian calendar and leave only a note about the holiday, why it's celebrated on the 6th? --Martyr 09:01, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Page move
Nightstallion, you shouldn't have moved the page without asking — this needs to be discussed. I'm opposed to the move; a Google test shows "Unification of Bulgaria" is the more popular term. Also, I don't see that many other examples to set a precedent. Todor→Bozhinov 11:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Those terms are equivalent, so the only reason to favour one over the other seems to be standardisation; and we've got German reunification, Yemenite reunification, Italian unification, Chinese reunification, Irish reunification and Korean reunification. Seems to be a pattern to me... &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 12:08, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Slanted language?
The section on "Background" gives a decidedly pro-Bulgarian slant on the question of Bulgaria's proper borders. This might seem irrelevant after nearly 100 years, but Macedonia apparently still matters. Specifically, the article identifies the borders of San Stefano as "the ethnic borders of the Bulgarians," including historical Macedonia, Adrianople, and parts of Serbia. This point might be contentious, as the ethnic mix of the outer regions is questionable. A citation here would help to defend this wording.Solomon Rose (talk) 01:06, 22 May 2008 (UTC)