bulgarien

Ekonomi bulgarisk svenska relationer innehåller logiska/språkliga fel export 2005......

Senaste kommentaren: för 3 år sedan av 188.149.7.192

sen sägs det öka till x 2006 och xx 2007, vet inte om siffrorna är fel eller om orden ökar är fel men det verkar inte logiskt. 188.149.7.192 25 februari 2021 kl. 22.29 (CET)

Översättning

I avsnittet "Politik: Regional och lokal förvaltning" översatte jag regional governor med 'landshövding'. Det kanske låter för specifikt svenskt att använda termen landshövding men jag kom inte på något bättre./Nicke 20 september 2005 kl.16.06 (CEST)

    Jag tror att landshövding blir bra. Det viktigaste är ju att folk begriper vad det betyder. Visst skulle man kunna kalla denna titel för regional guvernör men den titeln finns inte i Sverige och många svenskar begriper inte innebörden heller. Då är det bättre med landshövding så att folk förstår. /E70 20 september 2005 kl.17.30 (CEST)

Kyrillos och Methodios

Jag har tagit bort texten om Kyrillos och Methodios från historieavsnittet. Jag har inte sett någon annanstans att de skulle vara från Ohrid, enligt engelska WP var de från Thessaloniki-trakten och de själva var inte verksamma i Bulgarien som jag har förstått det, utan det var deras lärjungar som kom till Bulgarien lite senare./Nicke 4 oktober 2005 kl.00.13 (CEST)

National holiday

Dear free editors :) I started to studera svenska recently, so I came here to take a glance. You seem great, although I don't understand everything. Anyway there is a little error on the page: our national holiday is on March the 3rd, we don't have any festivity on 29 October. Hej då! Neva

Detaljgranskning

Användare:Popoff har bett om en detaljgranskning av artikeln. Jag vill tillägga att jag skrivit en rejäl del av artikeln om Bulgariens historia och tror att jag har lite koll.

  • Landsfakta: Nationalencyklopedin har annan uppgift om landets yta. Wikipedia påstår att BNP/capita 2003 var 9223 dollar, NE att BNP/capita 2005 var 2586 dollar. Har BNP sjunkit till en fjärdedel på två år? Även vad gäller Bulgariens folkmängd är skillnaden anmärkningsvärd.
  • Inledning: Behöver man nämna att Sofia ligger i närheten av Vitosja? Man skulle kunna tillägga att landet är en demokratisk republik och medlem i NATO och EU.

Historia: Avsnittet är en lagom lång sammanfattning av landets historia. Det saknas källor men jag antar att det är en sammanfattning av artikeln Bulgariens historia.

  • Geografi: Texten handlar främst om bergen, man skulle kunna nämna något ytterligare om de olika slättområdena som Donauslätten och kustområdet samt vilka floder som finns. Man skulle kunna skriva något ytterligare om klimatet och nederbörden. NE skriver utförligt om växt- och djurliv i Bulgarien.
  • Demografi: Enligt NE är nästan 90 % bulgarer. Man skulle kunna skriva något om var befolkningstätheten är hög och vilka områden som är Bulgariens Norrland.
  • Språk: Texten kommer uppenbarligen direkt från NE, fast omskriven med andra ord.
  • Religion: Texten är betydligt mer omfattande är motsvarande i NE men saknar källor
  • Ekonomi: Bra, men saknar källor
  • Turism: Bort med listan och Bulgarien som turistland skulle kunna beskrivas under Ekonomi eller i artikeln om Bulgariens ekonomi.
  • Politik: Man kan tillägga att grundlagen förbjuder etniska och religiösa partier
  • Regional förvaltning: NE påstår att Bulgarien är indelat i 9 oblast och 273 kommuner
  • Försvar: Man kan lägga till att Bulgarien är medlem i NATO och medverkar i ett par fredsbevarande insatser samt har styrkor i Irak. Det är inte sant att Bulgarien aldrig förlorat en strid, se artikeln Slaget vid Kleidion.
  • Kultur: Man kan skriva mer om bulgarisk film, teater och dans
  • Sport: Stycket om utmärkelser som olika idrottsmän fått känns som väldigt flyktig information.
  • Saknas: Bulgariens utbildningsväsen, sociala förhållanden (arbetslöshet, pensionsålder, socialförsäkringar), infrastruktur, massmedia.

Thuresson 18 april 2007 kl. 16.22 (CEST)

Utökning

Jag har nu ötökat artikeln väsentligt med texter, bilder tabeller och källor. Puts skulle nog behövas. Nu ger jag upp för ett tag. Kritik är välkomnande. Popoff 6 oktober 2007 kl. 01.02 (CEST)


Formatering av fotnoter
Skulle någon kunna hjälpa till med formateringen av fotnoterna? De behöver snyggas till lite. Som det är nu går det inte att göra en reflist2 utan att de överlappar i varrandra. Popoff 7 oktober 2007 kl. 12.48 (CEST)

Tackar! Då koncentrerar jag mig på det andra då. Popoff 7 oktober 2007 kl. 14.54 (CEST)

Jag har nu formaterat om de flesta fotnoterna. Popoff 8 oktober 2007 kl. 23.49 (CEST)

Utökning

Sportavsnittet är nu utökat samt att alla kb-mallar har ersatts med källor Popoff 2 januari 2008 kl. 04.17 (CET)

Avknoppning

Denna artikel var ganska lång. Ett par saker tycker jag skulle göra artikeln bättre:

Angående rubriken demografi: varför ligger sociala förhållanden under denna rubrik? Är det verkligen en del av demografin? Varför finns just den delen i sådana fall inte med i huvudartikeln Bulgariens demografi? Dessutom borde stycket i denna artikel bli kortare, en sammanfattning, av vad som står i den specifikare artikeln.

Stycket Religion borde få en egen huvudsida och en endast utgöra en sammanfattning i denna artikel. –dMoberg 13 maj 2008 kl. 23.11 (CEST)

Korruption

Citatet "flera länder har mafia, men i Bulgarien har mafian landet" låter ganska underligt - är det ett försök att visa på bristande språkbruk av den citerade eller kan det skrivas om på riktig svenska? Ztaffanb 16 oktober 2008 kl. 10.49 (CEST)

    “Other countries have the mafia,” said Atanas Atanasov, a member of Parliament and a former counterintelligence chief who is a magnet for leaked documents exposing corruption. “In Bulgaria, the mafia has the country.” Skulle jag ha låtit bli att översätta det till svenska kanske, eller översatte jag fel? Popoff 16 oktober 2008 kl. 10.55 (CEST)

Sorry for using english, but my swedish is still bad enough not to be able to use it. The section should be ommitted. There are no "Corruption" sections on country articles such as Tchad, Albanien or Niger, in which corruption is a much more persistent and grave problem than in Bulgaria. Generally, sections such as "Human rights", "Corruption" and so on underscore a somewhat political tone (because they are present only in a few artiles), which is a violation of NPOV. Not to mention, that the Bulgaria article is one of the very few country articles in the Swedish wikipedia (or maybe the only one), in which there is a special section on corruption. The least, it looks offensive. -- bulgarien  Tourbillon 31 maj 2009 kl. 12.01 (CEST)

    Du kanske har rätt i att det inte bör vara en speciell rubrik för korruption, men det vore synd att ta bort ett stycke som är rätt bra underbyggt med källor. Även i expempelvis Albanien tas problem med korruption upp, redan i inledningen. /rrohdin 5 juni 2009 kl. 18.01 (CEST)
      First, if we are to point out all the drawbacks of each country, then two-thirds of the information in each such article will be about corruption, human rights abuses, mismanagement, political scandals, ineffective healthcare and so on. Second, I agree the section was well-written and sourced - but it's simply putting a great accent on the problem, which isn't adequate when comparing with the lack of such information on other articles. Tchad is a featured article, yet there is almost no mention on the corruption issues there, except that the country is considered one of the most corrupt. Bulgarien is marked as a good article, yet again information on corruption is unusually volumous and it gives an impression that it's the gravest problem in exactly this country. It would me much better to simply point out, that Bulgaria is ranked on this or that place in terms of corruption, that corruption practices are a major issue, and so on. -- bulgarien  Tourbillon 6 juni 2009 kl. 15.40 (CEST)
        Kanske det. Men denna artikel handlar om Bulgarien, inte om något annat land och därför haltar jämförelsen. Varje artikel på Wikipedia granskas ju utifrån sina egna förutsättningar. Ett väl källbelagt stycke tar man inte bara bort utan vidare. Bygg istället vidare på andra delar av artikeln. På det sättet minskar givetvis korruptionsavsnittet betydligt. Riggwelter 6 juni 2009 kl. 15.50 (CEST)
          If you please, speak english (I suppose you can), I do not speak swedish well enough yet. Yes, it's the article on the country Bulgaria - and that is why it should have the biggest section, informing us how swarming corruption is everywhere, is that what you say ? It seems so. If each article is for itself, as you somewhat state, then I guess it would not represent a problem to enter all the information available on mismanagement and dubious combat readiness on the article Försvarsmakten then ? Or Sweden's problems with immigrants ? There are a lot of sources on these subjects, why is there so few information on them in the respective articles ? Because apparently you apply some sort of a double standart. There are sources about political corruption, smuggling, organized crime virtually about every country in the world - yet, the wikipedia article in Swedish severely points out in a large section how Bulgaria is the most corrupt country in the EU. Almost no mention of corruption in the Romania article, nor in the Portugal article, not even on country articles like Russia, Burma, Nigeria. The section should be ommitted, and the most important statements will be moved in the Economy section. -- bulgarien  Tourbillon 6 juni 2009 kl. 16.13 (CEST)
            Yes, if there is widespread mismanagement and dubious combat readiness in Försvarsmakten, and if serious and well-established sources can be found, I see no reason not to add such information in the article. But this is the article about Bulgaria, not about Försvarsmakten or any other topic. At Wikipedia, we improve articles mainly by adding information, not removing it. The section is well confirmed by reliable sources and should not be removed just because you do not find the corresponding information in other articles. Feel free to add more information to this article, and improve it by extending it. Riggwelter 6 juni 2009 kl. 16.22 (CEST)

Apparently you don't get deep enough into what I say, do you ? Anyway, I'll just copy the most important - "...if we are to point out all the drawbacks of each country, then two-thirds of the information in each such article will be about corruption, human rights abuses, mismanagement, political scandals, ineffective healthcare and so on.". Articles in wikipedia are not "improved" by adding all sorts of information to a particular country article in a huge amount. It's about, the least, adding the most important information on the main page, and putting detailed well-sourced information on secondary pages. Corruption should be mentioned, but all the rest should be moved into the article Economy of Bulgaria, simply because such detailed information on illegal practices doesn't fit to any country article. And I will continue giving examples, because one article can serve to illustrate what's wrong with another. -- bulgarien  Tourbillon 6 juni 2009 kl. 16.36 (CEST)

    I was just waiting for you to make a personal reference or to accuse me of not reading your statements... if you by that intended to add extra weight to your arguments, I cannot see that it did. The section about corruption is of course always possible to adjust and improve, and why not add a section about corruption to the corresponding country articles if you so think necessary? But to remove it - no, I don't see the reason why. Sorry. We are discussing the article about Bulgaria, not country articles in general. Such a discussion must be taken somewhere else. Right now, we talk about the article about Bulgaria and more specifically, the section about corruption. And right now, I cannot see that we have reached consensus for its deletion. Riggwelter 6 juni 2009 kl. 16.49 (CEST)
      I didn't accuse you that you don't read my statements, I accused you that you don't exactly get what I mean. First of all, I cannot add large ammounts of information here, as my language possibilities are limited. In the meantime, Swedish editors are very eager for this information to be kept in the main country article, while they do not add information on organized crime in other country articles. Second, while you don't see why the section should be removed, I don't see a reason why it should be kept, at least in its current form. If you think the existence of a "corruption" sub-section in the "Politics and State system" (!) section is right, I suppose it should become a practice then to add detailed information on organized crime everywhere and dub it as an "improvement". Do you think that is correct, in any sense of the word ? The fact, that we are talking about the Bulgaria article and a section of it, doesn't mean we shouldn't put an element of discussion about country articles overall, because all of them have something in common, and all of them should be built and improved on the same standards. -- bulgarien  Tourbillon 6 juni 2009 kl. 17.05 (CEST)
        As I said before: I am sure that the section about corruption in this article can be improved, but you want to delete it altogether - and did, before I rolled it back. But I simply do not agree with you that it should be deleted just because there aren't corresponding sections in other, similar articles. But - again - that is a different discussion which I strongly suggest you add to the village pump. I'd be happy to partake in a general discussion there. If you want to suggest improvements to the actual section in this article, feel free to do so. I am sure that those of us who speak swedish have no problem to adjust its contents, provided we reach consensus. Riggwelter 6 juni 2009 kl. 17.17 (CEST)
          It's not about the content of the section at all. It's about the presence of the section itself. I tried a compromise variant with keeping the essential and important information and removing the unsourced such, and moving the info under "Economy" - where it belongs. This solution, by reasons unknown, was removed. Can I expect consensus in such a case ? If not, I'll be glad to take it in the village pump. -- bulgarien  Tourbillon 6 juni 2009 kl. 17.24 (CEST)
            No consensus has, as far as I can see, been reached regarding the complete removal of the section. Until such consensus has been reached, it will therefor remain in the article. Do not delete it again unless you get more support for your action. Furthermore, if you cannot speak or write swedish, you cannot possibly have much of an idea what it actually says in the article/section. One of the basic requirements we must have on Wikipedia's contributors is that they should be able to use the language. That means that I am becoming less and less keen on using english for this rather futile argument, since this is Wikipedia in swedish, not english, bulgarian or any other language. I can understand that you do not like to see a section which indicates that your home country is corrupt (especially when there aren't corresponding sections in other articles - yet), but that is a completely different discussion. Riggwelter 7 juni 2009 kl. 14.34 (CEST)

I am equipped with a good automatic translator, so I have a clear idea of what it says. My last edit did not remove the section completely, just moved the most important of it under "Economy", where it belongs. You simply reverted the edit, without an actual assessment of what was changed (which is surprising, considering the fact that you're the one who claimed the section can be modified). In each country corruption is a socio-economic practice, not a type of political system, despite the spread of corruption to higher levels. In such case, why is the information placed in "Statsskick och politik" ? It looks merely as the country's governing system is outlined as a "mob-ocracy", which is apparently somebody's point of view. Yes, I do not like the fact that this thing is stuck exactly there. And I don't think anyone would like to see his country outlined as some sort of a bandit rogue state, which this current article somewhat points out, in an encyclopaedia claiming to be neutral. -- bulgarien  Tourbillon 7 juni 2009 kl. 18.13 (CEST)

    Corruption is wider and much more complicated than being just a economical issue. It also a political issue, and a central politcal issue in Bulgaria. It affects everything in Bulgaria, the relationship with the EU, development, democracy and so on. It is possible to argue that it is the most important political issue in the country now.--Ankara 7 juni 2009 kl. 18.26 (CEST)
      I don't think you can comment on such an issue with daring statements such as "central political issue in Bulgaria" and "affects everything" without being Bulgarian, and as I suppose, never have set foot in here. Judging by your nickname, you come (or somewhat originate) from a country with severe political and economic problems, and your inclusion in the dispute here is merely a mocking attempt without any positive aim. -- bulgarien  Tourbillon 7 juni 2009 kl. 19.08 (CEST)
        I do not understand Your point: ”you come (or somewhat originate) from a country with severe political and economic problems”. And, if so what difference does it make? This is a global encyclopaedia, not a contest between states. Dr. Ognian Shentov, Chairman of the Centre for the Study of Democracy: "In addition to the more traditional effects that corruption has on the general public as a type of informal taxation, in the context of prolonged transition in Bulgaria, it is having an impact in developmental terms. This includes areas such as education and health care, and the establishment of illicit monopolies in key sectors of the economy through drug trafficking" [1]. --Ankara 7 juni 2009 kl. 19.40 (CEST)(by the way, you are wrong about my relationship with Turkey)

It's good that you provided a serious study on the problem. The study says that corruption impacts economic development, not that illegal practices actually move the country - which proves my point that the place of the section is under "Economy". Furthermore, the section gives absolutely no information on efforts against corruption, and makes it look as it's something that ravages throughout the entire country. Yes, it's not a contest - and in such a case, I still can't understand why certain countries should be represented as "top of the line" despite having internal problems, while on others an accent should be put on their social, economic and political problems. -- bulgarien  Tourbillon 7 juni 2009 kl. 19.51 (CEST)

          Tourbillon: Since I was the one that actually wrote the corruption-part and have contributed to the most bulgarian-related articles in Swedish Wikipedia, I have to say that I like that part so the article can be considered as one of the most objective landrelated articles in Swedsih wikipedia.

Bulgaria is also the country that have most related articles in Swedish wikipedia with a star! Bulgarien, Bulgariska, Simeon I av Bulgarien, Bulgariens historia. I am pleased that you come with feedback on the article and I get your point that articles concerning Sweden, Albania and so on also should have a corruption-part, but those articles isn't even near as good as this one. Very soon I hope that even this article will be marked with a gold star. Considering the corruption part, I found sources from NY Times among other things, where I have to say that the quality of the part has to be considered as pretty well written. Popoff 4 augusti 2009 kl. 00.37 (CEST)

I agree that it is well-sourced, but a problem comes with its place within the article. Corruption is widely considered as a socio-economic, not a specifically political phenomenon. That is why it seems somewhat tendentious (given the dozens of allegations in the media) and irrelevant to be under the "Politik" section. In addition, nothing is mentioned about efforts to fight corruption (which do exist, and are becoming more and more successful) and their respective results. -- ☣ Tourbillon 17 augusti 2009 kl. 21.46 (CEST)

    I also agrre that corruption is mostly a socio-economic issue, but in this case it is also a political issue in Bulgaria. This section could also be placed in some other part of the article, feel free to come with a proposal in that matter or do the change on your own. One thing was mentioned in the very last sentence that the country do try to fight it and some other countries in the region is far mor worse in that topic. If you find more information concerning the fight of corruption, please add it. Popoff 18 augusti 2009 kl. 16.33 (CEST)
          Jag tycker att vi avsluttar diskussionen nu om var korruptionsavsnittet ska ligga, det handlar till stor del om ekonomi och ekobrott så det kan dock ligga kvar under ekonomi. Popoff 4 september 2009 kl. 15.15 (CEST)
            Vel, men kan vi snakke et skandinavisk sprog hér på diskussionen i fremtiden, fordi det er den svenske Wikipedia? Engelsk er sandeligen ikke behøvelig. Bogorm 7 september 2009 kl. 12.18 (CEST)
              Håller med ovanstående, men i detta fall är användare: Tourbillion bulgarisktalande, med svenska som förståelse, vilket utgör en bra tillgång för artikeln. Popoff 12 september 2009 kl. 20.04 (CEST)

Bulgarien under finanskrisen 2008

Någon som har mer information än de 3 st artiklarna från Di.se som jag har lagt till? Arbetslöshet, export-import borde beröras om än något Popoff 4 september 2009 kl. 15.15 (CEST)

Externa länkar ändrade

Hej, wikipedianer!

Jag har just ändrat 8 externa länkar på Bulgarien. Kontrollera gärna mina ändringar. Om du har några frågor, eller vill be boten ignorera vissa länkar eller hela artikeln, läs frågor och svar för mer information. Jag har gjort följande ändringar:

När ändringarna har blivit kontrollerade kan du använda verktygen nedan för att rapportera eventuella problem.

  • Om du har hittat länkar som påstås vara döda men inte är det kan du rapportera det som falskt positivt.
  • Om du har hittat fel i själva ändringen kan du rapportera en bugg.
  • Om du har hittat fel med själva URL:en, som till exempel att den använder en otillförlitlig arkivtjänst, kan du ändra det med URL-verktyget.

Hälsningar.—InternetArchiveBot (Rapportera fel) 16 april 2017 kl. 12.18 (CEST)

Tags:

bulgarien Översättningbulgarien Kyrillos och Methodiosbulgarien National holidaybulgarien Ej antagen till utvaldbulgarien Detaljgranskningbulgarien Utökningbulgarien Antagen till läsvärdbulgarien Utökningbulgarien Avknoppningbulgarien Antagen till läsvärdbulgarien Antagen till brabulgarien Korruptionbulgarien Bulgarien under finanskrisen 2008bulgarien Ej antagen till utmärktbulgarien Förlorar status som utvaldbulgarien Externa länkar ändradebulgarienSpecial:Bidrag/188.149.7.192

🔥 Trending searches on Wiki Svenska:

Ku Klux KlanMattias Johansson (fotbollsspelare född 1992)PåskdagenAnne HathawayNordirlandAmerican SniperGeorg RiedelSingaporeJosef StalinOlof PalmeMilitära grader i SverigeGunilla BoëthiusKazakstanCarl StarfeltLotta BroméMads MikkelsenGustav IIILista över musiktermerKronprinsessan VictoriaItalienSebastian LarssonLista över musikaliska former, stilar och genrerDocenternaLes FerdinandIan WachtmeisterWokeSaab ABEurovision Song ContestSvenska Hockeyligan 2021/2022Sveriges länOscar FantenbergCarla SehnÄlgarLista över länder efter folkmängdLista över Sveriges tätorterMao ZedongFlamingokvintettenMartin Beck (filmatiseringar)Gustaf Nilsson (fotbollsspelare född 1997)Noli me tangere (målning)Jonna SundlingDanmarkSvenskaKristoffer Olsson (fotbollsspelare)TennesseeAftonbladetChristina JutterströmVänsterpartietNytorgsmannenRonja Rövardotter (film)Lista över ishallar i Sverige efter publikkapacitetDouglas MurraySnabel-aKatarina av MediciVen (ö)PåskaftonRonja Rövardotter (TV-serie, 2024)Andra världskrigetEbba BraheIntersportFrancis Scott KeyVärldsmästerskapet i fotboll för herrarPuerto RicoIngrid CarlqvistPablo EscobarMaria-Pia BoëthiusHenrik JohnssonDemokratiindexTrandagenJohn Ajvide LindqvistLotta RamelSverigedemokraternaDiana, prinsessa av WalesKanadaAbbaMischa Billing🡆 More