This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 8 |
I've upped this to full protection because it's clear that this isn't solved yet. When I see new editors add vandalism edits to become auto-confirmed and overcome the semi-protection, there is a concern. You now have four weeks to sort this out, using the reliable sources noticeboard, dispute resolution, or in the last resort, a request for comment. Rodhull andemu 19:56, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
______________________________________________________________________________________
Just a quick question: Is it okay for me to state my position as to why I don't consider these sources to be reliable on the reliable sources noticeboard?-- Gaius Claudius Nero ( talk) 23:44, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
But why anybody would want to walk around with a goat's skull on their head is beyond me. Anyway, would it be controversial to add one of these images to the article? The helmet is prominently displayed in the Neue Burg. Sandstein 21:09, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
who is responsible for this article ,should be serious to correct an obvious mistake,because by all documents ,scanderbeg was born in Mat in the castle of Stellush,dibra at the time was not the principality of scanderbeg,but moisi gole,mi was the prince of diber —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.106.109.67 ( talk) 14:04, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
<s>See this edit ( [10]). The user is trying to reference to Barleti, but I have no idea who this Irene is. Help! -- sulmues ( talk) 16:54, 23 February 2010 (UTC) I'll correct myself, that's what the source says. Referenced.-- sulmues ( talk) 22:30, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
It seems that the bibliography somewhat disagrees about the origin of Skenderbeg. A new section should be introduced based on various sources like:
There are plenty of them mainly suggesting a Serbian origin. Suppose this needs to be added. Alexikoua ( talk) 15:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
The sources that you brought are not serious. They just throw there that he was of Serbian origin without fully referencing or investigating on the origin of Skanderbeg. Are you suggesting a Serbian or Greek origin of the Kastrioti family or of the Tripalda family (his mother's) because none of the sources that you brought specify that. The only source that according to you is suggesting that the Kastrioti family was of Serbian origin, cannot be seen, if clicked. -- sulmues ( talk) 15:38, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
The second source says it clear 'family of Kastriot'. These sources are just a few that make this claim, and as far I see they meet wp:rs. Alexikoua ( talk) 16:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I have no doubt that there are also plenty of sources in Google Books describing his origin as Albanian as well. Perhaps all the various theories could be discussed in the "Early life and family" section. They could also be mentioned in the Kastrioti article.-- Ptolion ( talk) 17:38, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I am interested in this subject and have been wanting to discuss some issues about it. Given this opportunity I'll reply to the sources presented. Before reviewing them I read the link about reliability of sources, which was presented by co-editor Alexikoua. This is my review:
Karađorđe Petrović(mentioned as George Petrovich), making it even more unrealiable.
%2Borigin&lr=&as_brr=0&hl=el&cd=7#v=onepage&q=skanderbeg%2Bserbian%2Borigin&f=false].If you read the summary of the book, you'll see that the book is a shortened version of the Encyclopedia of Islam. The Encyclopedia of Islam is not what anyone would call a reliable source.
Therefore for now, this discussion is over since I checked all the sources and I don't think that anyone can disagree with my input which was 100% according to the guidelines. Thank you for your time,---- ObserverFromAbove ( talk) 20:30, 26 February 2010 (UTC) 17:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
That's my point: to mention all these theories in one section, I'm not the one to judge every author. Alexikoua ( talk) 18:27, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Actually it seems that there is plenty of additional material:
Myths are not sources, quotations from textbooks of the 1910s are not sources, "is said" and similar versions again are not sources.-- ZjarriRrethues ( talk) 18:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
It would be interesting to hear a neutral opinion on this. Not just national advocating. Alexikoua ( talk) 18:44, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
People, please! For Wikipedia, it does not matter if she was Albanian or Serbian. But the fact is that some Serbian authors claim her Serbian origin, and it should be mentioned in the article.-- Mladifilozof ( talk) 13:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
As nothing was added i taged article. It must be mentioned all of this. There are too many sources. -- Tadija speaks 19:51, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok, there is no serious scholar that would say that the Kastrioti were not Albanians. As far as Vojsava Tripalda is concerned we have some sources that say Servian princess. However, these sources do not elaborate too much about her. As a matter of fact we have almost nothing on her account. The areas of the Pollog valley (today's Tetovo, and then between the Kingdom of Prilep and the Realm of Branković) were under the dominance of Serbian and Bulgarian rulers, although the majority of the population was Albanian, and there were also Albanian princes. We don't know if the Tripalda family was Albanian or not. It's just a speculation of a historian who looks at the Pollog map and finds out that a Serbian ruler is ruling there. I removed POV from Tadija because I believe that the wording should be very careful and should relate exclusively to Vojsava Tripalda. I suggest that a note of this nature be entered: Some authors think that Vojsava Tripalda may have been of Serbian origin, whereas others think that she was from an Albanian family. Noli states that she is an Albanian, Marin Barleti, Frang Bardhi, and Becikemi idem, and they are the main biographers. And don't tell me that they were primary sources because they spanned two centuries after Skanderbeg and everybody else relied on them. -- Sulmues Let's talk 13:58, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Can you please read before you blindly revert? I said you CAN mention it, but with the due care. And I also proposed the wording. -- Sulmues Let's talk 14:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Right after this sentence His mother was Vojsava, a princess from the Tribalda family, (who came from the Pollog valley, north-western part of present-day Republic of Macedonia), or from the old noble Muzaka (Musachi) family. You may enter the following Some authors think that Skanderbeg's mother was of Servian {{cn}} or Bulgarian origin{{cn}}. Be bold and go ahead and edit, and remove the POV sign. After you are done with it, if you feel like you should give an explanation on your edit, bring it to the talk page. -- Sulmues Let's talk 14:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
This is already explained and supported with an enless bibliography. Suppose it's time to see it on the article. Alexikoua ( talk) 16:28, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately all the sources that Tadija entered are unacceptable. He managed to enter two outdated tertiary sources (Chambers and Britannica), one outdated secondary source (Stevenson) through a snippet and no context, and a secondary source (Spandounes) who again points back to Barleti (who of course presents Skanderbeg as an Albanian.
As a result, we have no reliable sources to present Skanderbeg as of Serbian origin. Unless you give me a secondary source that goes into detail and presents some more reliable facts, I can't accept this version and I am going to have to revert. I thought Tadija had anything more than the sources that were brought already by Alexikoua. Those sources we already analyzed them and they are unreliable. -- Sulmues Let's talk 21:04, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I am sanctioned to give another 50 words of justification to any revert until the end of June so here it goes. Besides what I stated above, here are my thoughts: I have nothing contrary to the citation of a contemporary author that has done a serious study on Vojsava Tripalda and doesn't blindly repeat that she was from Serbian origin. The only contemporary scholar that we have to claim that Voisava Tripalda was from Serbian origin is Spandounes, who says only that, and then he points to the biography of Marin Barleti. Now Barleti doesn't say that she was Serbian, but Albanian, so Spandounes contradicts himself. If we really want to give some references to Skanderbeg that are sour, let's start with Oliver Jens Schmitt who really has made a bad biography of the national hero of the Albanians. Schmitt is a voice out of the choir and I would love if someone brings to the table what he says, because I want to see if he is fringe or serious.-- Sulmues Let's talk 21:45, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Also this: [ [37]] Can Serbs and Albanians live together? P Hondus - Western Balkans Security Observer-English Edition, 2007 - CEEOL: "...On the other hand, Skenderbeg, the legendary Albanian hero, is seemingly of an ethnically mixed background, with his mother reportedly being a Serb."
many of these sources arent that good theyre tertiary sources that repeat what has been written elsewhere..there has been since hopf (the editor of the relevant 'chronicles') at least some talk of the possibility of skanderbeg being half via his mother or even entirely slav based on spandouginos and the slavic names from what i know but what else..? sulmues above has summarized this position well which i think has been abandoned even if seriously considered once by some historians 87.202.22.2 ( talk) 07:24, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
We should be very careful with old sources, Skanderbeg main biographer was Marin Barleti. Although its battle numbers are exaggerated and sometimes he puts very long speeches in Herodotus style, I want to point out that basically all the other historians have repeated the same things. Barlet main stories are confirmed by archives of Venetians, Naples, Rome, Ragusa, Ottoman chronicles etc. Other important source is the chronicle of Muzaka, which has also been confirmed by archives and historians. There are many later speculations on various topics for eg. that Kastoria name comes from Kastrioti etc, but now they are all like urban legends and should be treated as such. Aigest ( talk) 08:53, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Certainly. Barleti says: "... Ioanes ... uxori Voisavae nomen erat, nó indigná co uiro tum pater nobilissimus Tribalorum princeps,...".
"Tribali" (Triballians) are the Serbs for the authors of that time. See http://www.archive.org/stream/historiadeuitaet00barl#page/4/mode/2up , p. 4 upper left. -- Euzen ( talk) 08:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Albanians, instead of stoling Alexander the Great and Constantine the Great... respect own history and historical facts! Skanderbeg is Serb by mother Vojislava and do not try to fake it as you did with fake encyclopedia in FYR of Macedonia. No passaran!!!!
Why you don't add that historical fact that he was half Serb? Wikipedia can use relevanat sources or to ask Serbian and real Albanian historians about that? I see that this article has a lot of not confirmed facts. You should clean it and write it correctly and real if you want people to trust to Wikipedia! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
109.93.25.103 (
talk) 11:43, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
He could hardly be Serb but rather Bulgarian. According to Bulgarian sources his brother's name was Stanish. Besides, Skenderbeg joined the European coalition to liberate Bulgaria at a time when the Serbs were Ottoman allies. -- Vladko ( talk) 15:22, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Gotta work on that, but am I missing anything? Why isn't it done so far? I remember from history lessons that there was an insurrection in 1481 in Albania, led by Gjon Kastrioti, son of Skanderbeg. He went through Himare. -- sulmues ( talk) 23:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
OK, this section is below.
His mother was Vojsava Tripalda, [1] a princess from the Tripalda family, [2] [3] (who came from the Pollog valley, north-western part of present-day Republic of Macedonia), or from the old noble Muzaka (Musachi) family. [4] [5] There are sources that claim that Voisava was of Serbian origin, [6] [7] and by mother, Skanderbeg also. [8] [9] [10]
References
Alexikoua, please, which sources should i add, and where? As all of those are ok, so we just need more. That will not be problem, with so many of those... -- Tadija speaks 17:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
The main text is ok, about the source: #1,2&3 are outdated and need to go (they aren't necessary) #4 is ok, #5 needs to go (better to use historians only). #6&7 are outdated and need to be replaced with this:
Can Serbs And Albanians Live Together? by Patrick Hondus. Western Balkans Security Observer English. Issue: 4 / 2007, pages: 412, on www.ceeol.com (p. 5: Skenderbeg, the legendary Albanian hero, is seemingly of an ethnically mixed background, with his mother reportedly being a Serb. One of his sons married Jerina, the daughter of Serbian despot Lazar Brankovic.) which meets all the wp:rs criteria. Moreover, source #7,9 are outdated, #8 is just fine and enough. Alexikoua ( talk) 20:32, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I don't think these very old sources fulfill WP:RS.
It is a fortune that we have Skanderbeg's biographies and we should use them for Skanderbeg article, not just short passages from old or very very old authors (some of them dead wrong) which have written for other things and just happened to mention Skanderbeg. No references, no argumentation, just plain short passages .. Really they are not interested on the topic itself and they can not be called specialists on this specific issue. Aigest ( talk) 18:39, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Britanica reference is outdated and wrong since it is pointing to the same old meme of Branilo and Kastriot, discredited before (Jorga, Noli 1947) and later (Ducellier 1987) by historians. You might want to use a later Britannica version, but per WP:RS "Tertiary sources such as compendia, encyclopedias, textbooks, and other summarizing sources may be used to give overviews or summaries, but should not be used in place of secondary sources for detailed discussion" and this is a detailed discussion, moreover later versions of Britannica don't support that view anymore, so it can't be used as a reference.
As for Patrick Hondus, I notice that first ..this guy is practically unknown in academic world, two ...his claim has no reference and three his book is not on topic, Skanderbeg is merely stated once through all his article. If all Skanderbeg biographers maintain that he was Albanian, surely an extraordinary claim like that should be based on extraordinary references not an unreferenced mere sentence of a practically unknown author.
I want also to bring out what Skanderbeg thought of himself since this pertain to this issue. Skanderbeg words in the letter he writes to Prince of Tarant before his expedition in Italy in 1462:
...Moreover, you scorned our people, and compared the Albanese to sheep, and according to your custom think of us with insults. Nor have you shown yourself to have any knowledge of my race. My elders were from Epirus, where this Pirro came from, whose force could scarcely support the Romans. This Pirro, who Taranto and many other places of Italy held back with armies. I do not have to speak for the Epiroti. They are very much stronger men than your Tarantini, a species of wet men who are born only to fish. If you want to say that Albania is part of Macedonia I would concede that a lot more of our ancestors were nobles who went as far as India under Alexander the Great and defeated all those peoples with incredible difficulty. From those men come these who you called sheep. But the nature of things is not changed. Why do your men run away in the faces of sheep?.. Croia 31 October 1460 see letter referenced in note 83 here
He is describing himself as Albanian. The same argument is used first by Noli in 1947 and by later historians. The letter is in Naples archive, you may find a latin version of it in internet and it is cited in Barletius work.
P.S. Epirotes was the term used for Albanians in that period and Albanians of that period believed they derived from Epirotes, curiously enough they didn't call themselves Illyrians:). Even Skanderbeg in Barletius book is called Epirotarum Principis Aigest ( talk) 21:58, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
His mother was Vojsava Tripalda, a princess from the Tripalda family, (who came from the Pollog valley, north-western part of present-day Republic of Macedonia), or from the old noble Muzaka (Musachi) family. [1] There are numerous sources that claim that Voisava was of Serbian origin, [2] and by mother, Skanderbeg also. [3] [4]
References
-- Tadija speaks 00:54, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
It's fine, text ok and sources meet wp:rs. I suggest we ask also to rfc. Alexikoua ( talk) 09:00, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Tadija, Britannica is still in use (see Encyclopedia_britannica#Fifth_era) and we shouldn't go after editions of more than 50 years ago, when the articles in Britannica have already changed many times. -- Sulmues Let's talk 16:48, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Guys, you made me curious. Who is Patrick Hondus? Aigest ( talk) 08:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
[ [39]]...a London-based independent researcher. Alexikoua ( talk) 09:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I had arrived up to that point since the first article link. I was curious because i found nothing about him over internet. Apparently he is a researcher (not well known though, the only ref I could find for him was about his article "Can Serbs And Albanians Live Together" )Is he a historian, sociologist, economist, journalist (whatever), has he other publications and how is he related to Balkan history? Aigest ( talk) 13:07, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Islamic desk reference By E. J. van Donzel brought as reference is full of controversies in all its claims.
I have left aside the claim on the origin but practically all the other claims on Skanderbeg are wrong so I don't find it RS especially in such delicate details. While for Encyclopedia Americana I can not state my detailed opinion since I see only snippets, but I stay to my general opinion expressed above about the use of tertiary sources in this topic as long as we have its biographers. Aigest ( talk) 10:41, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
It is not a good thing to accuse others of forgery and you should apologize for your statement. All the claims from Islamic desk reference I stated above, are on the reference Tadija brought here. I was giving my opinion on the sources Tadija brought and my opinions are based on the references that are used in the article. His earlier biographers (Barletius, Muzaka) and later ones (Noli , Hodgkinson) do not say what you keep claiming here. Aigest ( talk) 17:31, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
As per my knowledge of English, If someone says "one resisted until 1466", it means " his resistance ended in 1466". Check the English dictionary plz Aigest ( talk) 20:32, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
apart from my agreement with the albanian editors here more or less...what needs to be perhaps addressed more explicitly is the 'per natione/origine Serviano' mention of spandouginos and the vojsava triballian connection (was it a family name or an ethnic name in the sense triballian = slav of some kind..? ive seen both opinions)..if anything because such things (among others..) convinced hopf and even jirecek (if im not mistaken about the latter) 87.202.18.117 ( talk) 01:59, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
no no im referring to spandouginos description of **skanderbeg** as of 'Servian' nature/origin..as for the triballian=slav connection see william miller here eg http://www.jstor.org/pss/554790 im not saying that spandouginos' reference or the interpretation of vojsava as a 'triballian' hold any water necessarily but since there are knowledgeable people involved here they might be addressed somehow.. 87.202.54.152 ( talk) 21:19, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Hodgkinson is not a reliable source. He was a good friend of Albanians and Albanian governments from King Zog to Berisha and during the Kosovo war. He also worked as journalist, travel writer, "business intelligence" and UK government advisor on oil business. Read
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary-harry-hodgkinson-1440805.html
and this
The Albanian question: reshaping the Balkans, by J. Pettifer & M. Vickers (2007) referring to his role in the Anglo-Albanian Association. Apart from being non-neutral, it seems that he did not do anything more than copying previous works on Skanderbeg. --
Euzen (
talk) 08:57, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
The question is if we need to mention this posibility in the 'Early life and family' section. There is a huge bibliography that mentions this or the half Serbian origin of Skanderbeg:
And the tertiary sources:
There is also additional bibliography that mentions this possibility/fact ([ [40]], [ [41]], [ [42]], [ [43]], [ [44]], [ [45]]) but I believe the above sources are enough. Comments by involved parties are found one section above. Alexikoua ( talk) 05:58, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Reviewer: Euzen ( talk) 09:22, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
I am planning to review this article. I am of the opinion that does not meet the Good Article Criteria, especially the Neutral Point of View.
I am not native english speaker, therefore I cannot judge the quality of writting. There are some errors in the transcription from other languages (Greek, Slavonic etc) to english, but I will not focus much on them now. I suppose the author is willing to make corrections after suggestions from native speakers of Greek or other languages. This may be done through the discussion page.
a) It provides references to very many sources but these are selected so as to conform to the point of view that Castrioti/Skanderbeg was a national Albanian in the sense that Albanian nationality is understood today. From the references are excluded those which support that Sk. was Serb, both from mother and father. It is true that some of these references are difficult to find and are in non-english languages. For instance, an important work is that of the German
Karl Hopf, an expert in the medieval history of the Balkans who did original research in the Balkans and Italy. His work was published in German and I don't know if there is an english translation. Hopf supports that Sk. was a Catholic Serb. Also F. Blancus dedicates many pages of his work to examine the slavonic origin of Castriotae from the family of Tomco Marnavich (or Margnavich, or Margnavitius) although I am not sure if he finally accepts it as a certainty or not.
Of course we don't expect that a wikipedia author is some kind of professor of history with white hair, but at least the author should refer to a small collection of titles with a different point of view or, at least, mention that there is such a category of works. In the discussion page some of us have repeatedly mentioned the theory of Serbian origin of Sk. offering references but the author and others hastily discard it as "serbian propaganda".
But if the assumption of serbian origin from both parents is excluded as not well founded, there is no excuse for the silence on Vojsava's origin. Barleti was almost contemporary to Sk. and contemporary to his children and he certainly had first-hand information on Sk's parents. He says that Vojsava was the daughter of a Triballian lord, which in the medieval terminology means a Serbian. This is a simple and short information that could be included in half a line in the article. But moving to the opposite direction, the article missinforms the reader comfortably adopting the name "Tripalda" (*) and by telling us that "Tripalda" was a family which is wrong.
I conclude this part recognizing again that access to such original sources is difficult because they are in "strange" languages, such as Greek and slavonic. However some extracts and abstracts in english can be found in many university libraries and even online. Interested users are willing to help if authors agree. Reading a latin text cannot be considered OR, because latin is a standard part of thousands of historians, is adequately understood by italian and french speakers and latin references are 100% verifiable.
b) Some references do not verify the corresponding text. For example, the name "Vojsava Tripalda" points to Barleti as reference (No 7), but Barleti does not mention any "Tripalda". Instead he says that Vojsava was from a noble Triballian family ( ".. . nobilissimus Tribalorum princeps..."). References No 8 & 9 are supposed to support the "Tripalda family" but these are tertiary sources, translations of translations, and possibly biased. This distortion of the name is not a minor editorial issue but is quite important, as I will explain in my comments on neutrality.
(*) This "Tripalda" is taken from the Historia della casa Musachia, italian manuscripts from around 1600, published by Hopf. Unfamiliar names are heavily distorted and italized in those manuscripts (e.g. Moameto, Amuratto). Distortion of "Triballian" to "Tripalda" in Musachi's manuscript is an evidence that Musachis were unfamiliar with the name (or they were not happy with it either).
"Tripalda" is found in italian sources. This -da is a suffix that turns some names to female, while -do is for male, (e.g. Ronaldo - Ronalda) in latin languages. Actually means "Voisava the Tribaldian (lady)".
I propose that should appear as secondary name in parenthesis, as there are some more Voisavas in history and more articles may appear later.-- Euzen ( talk) 10:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
You cannot have a broad coverage if you don't have a broad spectrum of references. Some aspects of "broadness of coverage" are discussed in the previous paragraph. I understand "broad coverage" not the full descripion of life from childhood to death but also the coverage of many points of view on the subject. The article can be broader if it includes at least the following:
- Coverage of all views regarding Skanderbeg's origin.
- A brief comment on the status of national identity and national geography in the area in the middle ages (15th-16th century). The reader has to understand what the historians of that period meaned by terms like "Albanian", "Serbian", "Greek", "Triballian" etc.
- A criticism on the biographies of Sk. It has been already recognized by Gibbon (and possibly by others earlier) that Barleti and other biographers exaggerated Skanderbeg's personality. Gibbon discribes Barleti's work as "a voluminous cloack with some false embellishments" in the footnotes of his History. Other contemporary byzantine historians do not even mention Sk. (like
Doukas (historian), while others dedicate only few lines about him. The author does not have to include criticism on Sk/beg's biographies produced in Albania in the 20th century, but he could just mention the importance of Sk. as a basic element of Albania's national myth. Nothing is wrong in national myths in general and every nation or state has or should have one or more. But the outsider reader has to know this, and this only adds to the broadness of the article.
Euzen, I fully agree with you and everything you wrote on this page, especially in this subtitle about coverage. The way article is written now, it should be renamed to Skanderbeg in Albanian nationalistic mythology. -- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 11:02, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
This is the main weak point of the article. I mentioned above some examples of this bias and here I will expand some more. Bias is obvious from the very first word of the article: "Gjergj". This is only the albanian version of the name, found mostly in tertiary albanian sources, but is not the name that is normally found in the original literature. All the existing biographies of Skanderbeg are mostly based on that of Marin Barleti. This biography no-where mentions Skanderbeg as "Gjergj" ( http://www.albanian history.net/texts16-18/AH1510.html). Barleti's early translators refer to Sk. as "Georges" (Lavardin, 1576), "George" (Jones, 1596) or "Georgius" in latin. Another early biographer, Fank Bardhi/Franciscus Blancus in his 1636 book calls him "Georgius Castriotus" (See front page of his book at Frang Bardhi, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frang_Bardhi) and only in his 1635 "Dictionarium latino-epiroticum" (page 58) names him both "Georgius" in the latin text and "Gierg" in the albanian text. Therefore, the article in Wikipedia should start firstly with the latin name, not only for historical reasons but because this is the name that a scholar would like to look for in a library catalog or in a search machine. Interestingly, the Latin or other main europan language version of the name does not appear at the introduction of the article.
The "peculiar" selection and even alteration of original names characterizes the whole article.
Some more examples:
Reviewer: Plenty.
Rev.: Why not??
This site includes citations from "secondary sources" that you prefer. Citations are taken from a K. Hopf's work whom I mentioned earlier (references 189, 190 ...). Many names out of citations may be in albanian form (probably by an Albanian author) and some in slavonic, but inside citations are original and formal, i.e. latin or latinized Greek. See Ch. 4, "Arianiti":
The reader will notice that many names of questionable or mixed or obscure nationality are linked to other Wikipedia articles (many of them stubs) where the reader is informed that the person is "albanian". For example,
Gjergj Arianit Komneni is again "albanian" and has a "distant relation with the the famous Byzantine Komnenos dynasty from Asia Minor". However, more than a century later, in the manuscript that I mentioned above, Musachi says "È di bisognio notificarve, ..., che la Signora Scanderbega, il suo proprio nome era Andronica de casa Comninata Ò vero Comnino" (We need to notify ... that Lady's Scanderbeg proper name was Andronice from the House of Comneni, a true Comnene". Musachi also says that has blood ties with this lady. Musachi should have been more than happy that Comnenos' blood was in his and Sk's family tree, because Comneni was a realy noble family, directly related to Byzantine royalty, while their Albanian or Epirot roots involved only minor landlords and heads of obscure mountainous villages. Titles given to them later were only inexpensive rewards from their services as mercenaries by Italian despots and had no face value.
The repeated cross marriage between the noble families of that area is well established and is unquestionable. However, the article follows the logic "if one in the family is Albanian, all the family is Albanian". Certainly we are examining a highly phallocratic society of that period, when it was believed that "the father begets the children". Nevertheless, under todays values and scientific knowledge the mother's contribution to the family is considered equal to the father's and phallocratism and machism have no place in wikipedia articles. If the father is Albanian and the mother Serbian, the children are mixed. If the mother is not Serbian but comes from the Musachi family, again the lineage is mixed.
On the use of certain linked articles as auxiliaries of this article I had already commented earlier, but user Sulmues requested "quck delete" on the basis of some acrobatic arguments.
May I assure the reader and any interested party that this issue is highly related and important for this review and the basis of recommendations that will follow. For the moment I will only recommend the editor(s) to re-examine the use of term "Albanian" in this article (if it has ethnic significance) and inform the reader on the possible mixed origins of most persons (including Sk. himself) or on the obscurity of family lines and ethnicities. If they do not agree on revisions, I will not insist, but I have the right to express my opinion. Further deletions of my review will be considered malevolent.--
Euzen (
talk) 17:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
The same albanization is applied on medieval toponyms. Notably, the names "Epirus" and "Epirotes" are almost eliminated and in most cases replaced by "Albania" and "Albanians". In the original sources, like Barleti and Blancus, the term "Epirus" is widely used and Skanderbeg himself is called "Epirotarum Princeps" (Prince of the Epirotes). Epirus, a geographical area wider than today's Albania, was then (as is today) inhabited by various ethnicities, mainly Albanians, Greeks and Slavs and secondary Latins, Gypsies and others. Indeed, Sk. allied with christians of all the local ethnicities in fighting the Turks, as I will explain later. "Epirus" and "Albania" are synonymous in Blancus ("Epirus seu Albania" in many parts of his text). Of course that Albania was only a geographical term and there were no states or borders. Consequently, people from that geographical area, independently of their language, religion or other collective identity, are called Epirotes or Albanians by contemporary authors viewing the area from the comfort of their european clubs. As I recommented earlier, the article should clarify the meaning of "Albanian" so that the reader does not get the false impression that national Albanians are meant. The word "Epirotes" should be used in cases that we are not sure even for the language of the people, for example for people with non-albanian names.
Similarly other historical toponyms are changed. E.g. the classical "Dyrachium", appearing as such in relevant literature till 19th century, is changed to "Durres" which is the modern Albanian name. The encyclopedically correct approach would be the display of both names, so that the reader can verify the reference by searching in old books and position the place on a modern map.
In general, the massive albanization of names in the article gives the unaware reader the impression that in Castrioti's time the whole area was inhabited by a single nation that is the ancestor of what is today ethnic Albanians.
But even when the names retain their original, non-albanian form, the nationality of the person is arbitrarily ascribed as "albanian". For example, "... managed to capture some important Albanian noblemens, including ... Vladan Giurica ..." (The Last Years). In this case the man has the typical serbian name Vladan (and common to all slavic world) but the author insists that he is albanian. Is the author aware of any "ethnicity declaration" of Vladan?
In other cases whole groups of people (such as soldiers) are collectively called "Albanians", although the historical research leads to a different conclusion. Of course this collective "albanization" of thousands of persons may be found also in prominent historic works as Gibbon's history. But since Gibbon the science of history has progressed and new data are available. These new data should have their place in an article as lengthy as the one we are reviewing. One can notice that the volume of this article about a brave local hero who had a secondary role in history, surpasses that of Alexander the Great and is comparable to Napoleon I. This is not bad at all, but such a long article should accomodate more points of view and opinions other than those of the Albanian encyclopedias. A good example of this aspect is the article on John Hunyadi, a contemporary and co-fighter of Castrioti. That article starts by displaying Hunyadis names in six (6) relevant languages, but most importantly, under the section "Legacy" recognizes that Hunyadi is part of a national myth and is claimed by more than one nations, including Hungarians and Romanians. This is a good example of a Good Article, at least from the neutrality point of view.
But I wish to explain briefly why the so called "Albanian" fighters of Castrioti's are not necessarily of Albanian ethnicity but a mixture of ethnic Albanians, Greeks, Serbians and others of obscure or no ethnicity. After all we must have in mind (and the article should remind us) that we are in a period when many nations have not emerged yet, and for many people religious segregation was more important than national. Some information about those "Albanian" armies comes to us in relation to their expedition in South Italy and subsequent service as mercenaries in various countries, known under the Greek term " Stratioti".
"Epirotes" and "Albanians", as "Epirus" and "Albania", are used interchangeably in sources of that time, mainly Barleti and Blancus. They have clearly a geographical meaning. Blancus repeats so many times "Epirus seu Albania" as if he wants to underline this synonymy. For some reason Blancus is investigating these terms as were used in epistles, historical texts etc. It is possible that either some debate or missunderstanding was emerging already or the term "Epirus" was not familiar to the new readers. Here is only one example:
Notice that even "Arnavut" is considered synonymous to "Epirot". Surely in his time (17th c.) "Epirus" was becaming archaic and was gradually replaced by the latin "Albania", something understandable as the Greek influence on literature had almost ceased. In later sources (e.g. Gibbon) we rarely find "Epirus" and "Epirotes" when referring to 16th c. This was done in good faith as Gibbon was accepting the synonymy established by the primary sources. This good faith cannot be presumed in authors after 19th c. as the Albanian nation becomes a recognizable entity and the Albanian state is on the making. The term "Epirus" re-appears again in 19th c. (in travel literature etc) but frequently in relation to ethnic Greeks or in geographical or political context.
The study on "stradioti" mentioned above involves names but no nationalities. On the connection between names and nationalities we may discuss elsewhere, as we agree that names do not always indicate nationality (see debate about Vladan).
For this article I propose that frequent use of epithet "Albanian" is avoided unless it is clear that it refers to someone who possibly was considering himself Albanian at that time. Alternatively (and preferably as is very unlikely that someone declared nationality), a paragraph should be added to explain the meaning of "Epirus" and "Albania" as it evolves in primary, secondary and tertiary sources accordingly. This will be both encyclopedical and fair.--
Euzen (
talk) 11:30, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
5. Is it stable?
Not very, but really needs more revisions and editions. So, let it roll.
6. Use of images
I think it's OK. The pictures of Alfonso of Aragon and Ferdinand of Naples could be removed without much loss, so that the article gets a bit shorter.
--
Euzen (
talk) 08:44, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
May I ask who is the nominator, since User:Sulmues removed the nomination tag? Alexikoua ( talk) 22:40, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
In last souple of weeks text of the article has been significantly changed (unfortunatelly I can not say this for POV in the article) and therefore I propose to extract all non resolved issues based on this review and all talk pages in archive and to try to work on solutions by focusing on each issue. I am preparing list of non resolved issues here and I propose that we use talk page of this article in order to prepare undisputed list of nonresolved issues that should be tranfered here on this talk page and then resolved by joint efforts. GA nomination is not important, what is important is that we really make this article GA. -- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 16:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)-- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 16:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)]
and your revert of my edit in Scanderbeg article. I think I will also delete the names of Scanderbeg on Albanian and Turskish language, because you obviously failed to notice that there are no "primary Albanian/Turskish sources, i.e. from 16th to 18th century and" if you bring them "we may update the article". By the way, who are we and how can I become one of we?-- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 16:52, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Although I fully agreed with you and your logic of deleting all names without primary source of information, you are using ad hominem attacks on me, writing about myself and topics of my wikiexperiance, interests and editing, instead writing about my comments. That reaction could lead me to conclusion that you are not editing according to NPOV policy and that you unintentionally scored autogoal. If I use the same arguments you did when deleting Serbian name of Skenderbeg and if I would like you insist on having primary sources for naming this person, I should delete both Turkish and Albanian name from the text of the article. If there are no primary Albanian/Turkish sources from "i.e. from 16th to 18th century" how do you know what was his name on Albanian/Turkish language? Now you have three alternatives:
-- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 21:11, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
If we can't use the primary source argument (I am wondering if there is any wiki rule about this matter) for Albanian name (which I completely agree) than we can not use it for any other language. He is very important for Serbs too, no matter how can Vojsava name sound, or how other names of his family members can sound (Kostandin, Stanisha ....). His family members were even present at Battle of Kosova 1389. together with Serbs. Then he fought against Serbs, communicated with their leaders, married his family members to other Serb rulers, entered with his army territory that was inhabited by Serbs, his family members were Serb vasals during Dushan empire.... At the same time there is Turkish name of Skanderbeg in the article despite the fact that there are no primary sources on Turkish language and despite the fact that he fought against Turks also, ..... Using primary source argument for Serbian name of Skanderbeg only is simply a way to artificially avoid any possible connection with Serbs and against NPOV.-- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 07:27, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Sulmues, I understand that you feel like the father of this article, but please do not overdo it. Wikipedia is the legitimate owner of the article. You may always publish your own article using your own means (book, web-site etc) under your real or other name. Anyway, thanks for accepting some of my recommendations and reverting the names. But there is a lot more to be done. I have the ambition that this article surpasses that of other encyclopedias. For this discussion I would advise you to stop recycling the argument that "he is Albanian and National Hero of Albania" as it is not convincing. There is a difference between "Albanian" and "National Hero of Albania". Take a similar case: The newly founded Republic of Macedonia is almost venerating Alexander the Great as a National Hero. Would you accept undoubtedly that Alexander was "Macedonian" in the sense that the Rep. of Macedonia ascribe to this term? In the references there is link to the online book of Barleti ( http://www.archive.org/stream/historiadeuitaet00barl#page/n1/mode/2up ). Could you please give us the page where Barleti (probably Albanian himself) says that Castrioti is Albanian? I am not saying that this statement does not exist in the book. I am still looking for it with my poor latin. Finally, may I request that you kindly stop deleting the parts of my review that you don't like. Review means criticism. Deletion of criticism means censorship and is not permitted in an open encyclopedia. If you disagree with something, you are welcome to discuss it here. NOT between the lines of my review. Thanks.
First Sulmues deleted name of Skanderbeg on Serbian language because he insisted that (only Serbian) name of Skanderbeg should be referenced by "primary Serbian sources, i.e. from 16th to 18th century". When I explained that there are no "primary Albanian/Turksih sources, i.e. from 16th to 18th century" and that Skanderbeg had much more family and proffesional relationships with Serbs than with Turks (name in Turkish language is not deleted) then ZjarriRrethues introduced new rule (also valid only for Serbian language), that I should prove that "name used in Serbian historiography was one of the predominant names used in international historiography" despite the fact that Serbian name of Skenderbeg is much closer to the name Skanderbeg predominantly used in international historiography, than Albanian name Skënderbeu. Writing the name of Skanderbeg in both Turkish and Serbian language does not imply that he is Turk or Serb by nationallity, but is simply giving more information to the reader, about how was his name pronounced on languages that have significant written sources about him or his family members and events that he was involved in. I noticed that both ZjarriRrethues and Sulmues are referring to some WE that are more entitled to edit this article than other users. I am sure that such attitude is as wrong as deleting of the article text supported with rules valid only for Serbian language. Group of WE editors should not be surprised with weak status of the article. -- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 22:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Yess.... I found one very nice primary source for name of Skanderbeg on serbian language and importance of Skanderbeg for Serbs. It is The Mountain Wreath, one of the most important or maybe the most important poem on Serbian language written by Petar II Petrović-Njegoš at the beggining of 19th century (more than half of the century before Albanian alphabet was defined) and published in 1847. Sulmues you can find here a link to the english translation from serbian language "Скендербег је срца Обилића, ал умрије тужним изгнаником" and it is "In Skenderbeg beats Obilic's heart, but he perished as a forlorn exile." [49]. -- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 10:56, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
It already is.-- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 08:49, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Sulmues, you again (for the third time) invented another special rule ("historical primary sources") valid only for Serbian language (but not for Albanian, Turkish...) and by doing that you are breaking NPOV policy. Also, sentence "Feel free to expand..." is against basic fundamentals of wikipedia, that is that wikipedia is free encyclopedia for reading and editing and it is not you who should decide what should I feel free to edit or not. Your editing and comments about this article (you even sent me messages on my talk page complaining about my editing of this article [50] - unwanted correspondence that you even continued by threatening me ( by sending me warnings [51]) when I copied that correspondence here, where it belongs) are not only against basic fundamentals of wikipedia and wiki policies, but can be easily defined as Wikipedia:Harassment and such behaviour is not "acceptable or without consequences". -- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 12:53, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
This is fourth special rule ("article, poem, book.." is not suitable source) valid only for Serbian language (but not for Albanian, Turkish...) and another proof that this article is subject of POV pushing. -- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 08:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
"Albanian resistance continued sporadically until 1912 when Albania was no longer part of the Ottoman Empire."
I propose to delete this sentence because it is without any source, irrelevant and untrue. There are lot of uprisings of Albanians, especially after young turks regime was installed. Not only in the region of Albania, but also regions with Albanian population, especially in Kosovo, Metohija and Macedonia in period between Lidje e Prizrenit 1878 and 1912 (when Albanian rebels conquered Skopje). But since this has no connection with Skanderbeg and is irrelevant for the article, I propose to delete this sentence. -- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 12:42, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
It is safer to delete anything referring to resistance of Albanians against Turks after 16th c. otherwise this article will get too hot to handle. During the Ottoman occupation the Christian Albanians were a little better than slaves and the Muslim Albanians were the right hand of the Ottoman Empire. The Muslim Albanians are held responsible for atrocities all over the occupied Balkans. There are thousands of references on that. The resistance was very rudimentary, if any. A crash test will be a disaster.-- Euzen ( talk) 19:58, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
The only "Chamerians" who did resistance and participated in the Greek Revolution were the Greek "Souliotai". These were not "Albanians" but "Arvanitai" as called in Greece, i.e. bilinguals (greek & albanian) with Greek national awareness, massacred by the Turcalbanian
Ali Pasha in early 19th c.
--
Euzen (
talk) 14:27, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
If some "Albanian resistance" has to be mentioned in this article, then for the sake of neutrality the vastly greater "Albanian cooperation" with the Ottomans should also be mentioned in the same paragraph. Unfortunatelly for Castriotis and the other major families of the story (Musachis, Thopias etc), the newer branches of their family trees are full of names that the patriarchs wouldn't approve, I suppose. Regarding the incorporation of Albanians into the Ottoman system, the reader may be directed to the article List of Albanians and count the Turc-albanian prime-ministers (about 45 in total), the veziers and the other officials-- Euzen ( talk) 14:27, 3 October 2010 (UTC).
"Skanderbeg was a prominent historical figure in the history of Albania and of the Albanian people."
Albania did not exist till beggining of 20th century. One can not be historical figure of country that was created 500 years after he lived. What about those 500 years? Of what country Skanderbeg was historical figure during that period? This is completely wrong.
Also, it is not only Albanian people that find him important. There are also people of Macedonia or other countries that find him important and even erecting monuments of Skanderbeg in the centres of their towns (Skopje, Prishtina, ....), naming schools after him (Preševo in Serbia), ..... The conclusion can be made that he is specially important for all Albanians, not only those living in Albania.
I think that above mentioned sentence should be changed to be like this:
"Skanderbeg was a prominent figure of medieval history and Albanians." -- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 14:44, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
So He was important to Albania because he was the first that created it! -- Vinie007 14:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Maybe we do not understand the term Albanian state the same way. If Albanian state means Abania than you are wrong because it was created in 20th century. If that means state that belongs to the people who declare themselves as Albanians then you are again wrong because such national states were not existing in medieval times, but only from 19th century. Using the term Albanian state could misled some reader to think that Albania existed 500 years before it was created. As WhiteWriter said, "Alania was created almost 500 years after Skanderbeg died". What Sulmues said does not support his theory that he was prominent historical figure in the history of Albania because League of Lezhë is not Albania. It is union of medieval principalities. In those principalities lived not only Albanians, but Greeks (mostly south), Vlachs (mostly at Moskopolje), Serbs ,.... therefore it would be wrong to state that such medieval principalities that belonged to feudal families (Kastrioti, Topia...) were Albanian national states in the sense of constitutional national states that will be founded 500 years after Skanderbeg. -- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 07:59, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
"..through the work of his main biographer, Marin Barleti, remembered for his struggle against the Ottoman Empire.."
There are lot of other written sources about Skanderbeg and if we leave above mentioned sentence the way it is, someone could be misled to conclusion that only Marin Barleti wrote about Skanderbeg and that only one book of Marin Barleti is source of information about him.
More important, this sentence is not supported with the well referenced text in the rest of the article that says:
"After his military school Skanderbeg went up the ranks and led battles for the Ottoman Empire. For his military victories, he received the title Arnavutlu İskender Bey, (Albanian: Skënderbe shqiptari, English: Lord Alexander, the Albanian) comparing Kastrioti's military brilliance to that of Alexander the Great. Skanderbeg distinguished himself as one of the best officers in several Ottoman campaigns both in Asia Minor and in Europe. He even fought against the Greeks, Serbs and Hungarians. Sultan Murad II gave him the title Vali as a governor in Krujë and Dibër ... "
First, I doubt that there is any person that remembers his struggle against Ottoman Empire because it was almost 600 years ago and nobody lives that long. Second, it is obvious that he fought not only against Ottoman Empire, but also for very long time for Ottoman Empire and that he should be grateful to Ottoman empire for granting him the title of Vali and governance in Kruje and Diber. Also, he fought against Greek, Serbian, Austrians, Venetian... princes and their armies and for Kingdom of Naples, Ottoman empire, Austrians ....
Since it is obvious that biography written by Marin Barleti is not only source of information about Skanderbeg, that nobody remember any of this events, and that he fought against/for almost all surrounding empires and principalities, that he was fighting for Ottoman Empire most of his life, leaving above mentioned sentence in the lede could mislead some reader to believe that only Marin Barleti biografy of Skanderbeg described his struggle only against Ottoman Empire that was main event of his life.
Therefore I propose fundamental changes of the text in the lede, in order to correspond with well referenced text in the rest of the article and to avoid misleading of the potential readers.-- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 08:41, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
I would love to look at them (can you please provide me with some links?) despite the fact that I don't understand connection of your reply with my above comment.-- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 22:42, 30 September 2010 (UTC)