Template talk:History of Bulgaria

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Bulgaria This template is within the scope of WikiProject Bulgaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bulgaria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BulgariaWikipedia:WikiProject BulgariaTemplate:WikiProject BulgariaBulgaria articles History This template is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles

The Byzantine domination period IMO should be included, because otherwise how would an uninformed reader expain the gap between the First and Second bulgarian empires?  /FunkyFly.talk_   19:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, "Independent Bulgaria" seems a bit ugly; wouldn't "Kingdom of Bulgaria" be better? It would be more coherent with the following "People's Republic of Bulgaria" and "Republic of Bulgaria".--Aldux 00:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The current colors of the template make it very hard to read. Any objections to changing the colour scheme ? - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 09:52, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is no problem. I think, however, that the icon of St Theodore should stay because it is one of the most recognizable symbols of medieval Bulgaria. It is more recognizable than the coat of arms of the Shishman dynasty, which in Arabic style - something very distant from the Bulgarian culture. --Gligan (talk) 13:31, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will keep the icon, the coat of arms is just a temporary addition. - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 14:50, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is much more important that Bulgaria was destroyed, then the name of a dinasty. Jingiby (talk) 04:59, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that  FunkyFly   is right. Like we have 'Ottoman Bulgaria' for the period 1396-1878 we ought to have also something like 'Byzantine Bulgaria' for the period 1018-1185, even if there seems to be no such article as yet. Apcbg (talk) 10:41, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree that such article 'Byzantine Bulgaria' has to be created. Jingiby (talk) 11:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I continue to insist the stabile version with the chapter Byzantine conquest to be kept. Jingiby (talk) 16:13, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No reason was specified for the changes concerning the Byzantine conquest of Bulgaria that have been recently made, nor discussion was held here. There is no consensuss about this controversial changes. Please IP, if you continue blind reverts and avoid to discuss your ideas here and to reach a consensuss, I am going to request this template to be semi-protected. Jingiby (talk) 05:41, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]