This is I fear the danger of relying on Wikipedia without checking the sources tit uses. The table was made by combining two sources: Teplov's report and the Ottoman interpretation of his figures, obviously a very dubious way to interpret data, not to mention something that would not be available at the time.
It's possible of course that the Eastern Rumelian census was biased in favor of the Bulgarians, though I haven't seen definite evidence or opinion to confirm this (and as I said, it was the only Bulgarian census that used the nationality definition favored by the Greeks). And if it should be suspected of pro-Bulgarian sympathies just on account of Eastern Rumelia being dominated by Bulgarians, so should the Patriarchate be suspected of pro-Greek sympathies. Your example in shows that at least concerning the later censuses figures the number is at most between that of the figures claimed by the Patriarchate and the Bulgarian census, though closer to the later, when considering the number of Greeks who left Bulgaria between 1906 and 1926: considering that the number of Greeks who left Bulgaria were about 60-70 thousand, the figures of the Patriarchate would leave about 20-30 thousand Greeks unaccounted for.
Of course I agree this was largely irrelevant to Greek attitudes or to British attitudes for that matter, who uses Greek claims as an excuse to create Eastern Rumelia in the first place...
The most important thing to remember in the interminable debates about ethnic population in Macedonia and Thrace is that Thessaloniki/Solun/Salonica/Selanik/whatever is rightfully Jewish