Talk:Albania/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Sentence about Muslim majority, pre 1912

@Khirurg: you placed that quote and all. It reads the following [1]: "After almost 500 years of Ottoman rule and 300 years with a Muslim majority population, Albania was more influenced by Turko-Oriental culture than perhaps any other country in the region." Your interpretation ""for three hundred years during five centuries" is extremely poor writing (what about the other two hundred years), and last I checked Albanian still has a muslim majority. The way this is written implies Albanian no longer has a muslim majority, which we all know is not true". I draw your attention to the section in the article about religion that outlines clearly that Albania is still a Muslim majority country (some 60%) so to claim that that part is not covered is a misnomer. Also there is a contradiction in what you said "what about the other two hundred years" in relation to the source. If where counting from 2018 going back 300 years it leaves around another 300 years of a 500 year period as not being Muslim because we are adding the post 1912 period which until today spans just over a century and that era is not Ottoman. That is not what Misha wrote. He says that of some 500 years of Ottoman rule, 300 were with a Muslim majority and Albania was exposed to strong Turkish cultural influence. If you consult the source and wider paragraph the cut off point is 1912. As the sentence does in the book, the sentence in the article is meant to overall round off what transformations happened during Ottoman rule without making the section a fork in an article, as a Islamization of Albania article already exists. Cheers.Resnjari (talk) 23:35, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it's mentioned in the article that Albania has a Muslim majority, but much much further down. A reader that only reads the History section may conclude that Albania no longer has a Muslim majority. And yes, "for three hundred years during five centuries" is extremely poor writing (which 300 years? the first 300? the middle 300? the last 300?). If you want to state that Albania has been Muslim majority for the last 400 years because Ottoman rule ended in 1912, we can do that easily by just changing 300 years to 400 years. Or, we can do away with "last 300 years", and change it to "since the 17th century". Khirurg (talk) 23:43, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

@Khirurg:, the sentence i wrote was quite clear "For three hundred years Albania had a Muslim majority population during five centuries of Ottoman rule" and it stayed true to Misha without any OR additions etc. What your referring to about changing it into 400 years or adding the 17th century is OR and would be source manipulation of Misha as he cuts it off at 1912 and only refers to the Ottoman period and not an additional post Ottoman century. If your insistent on a additional source covering 1912 onward and a sentence after which states Islam is still the majority religion of Albania, that is fine so readers will be clear about things.Resnjari (talk) 00:11, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

If you want to add an additional source to cover post-1912, that's fine. However, I don't think an additional sentence is necessary. Khirurg (talk) 00:17, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

I added Merdjanova which directly refers to the contemporary era while also highlighting the past and is a source from this decade as well. Elements from Misha are still kept intact.Resnjari (talk) 01:07, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

No, the same problems remain. "For three hundred years of nearly five centuries of Ottoman rule it had a Muslim majority population" is poor prose. Plus, it's also inaccurate. I just re-read Schwandner-Sievers more carefully, and she doesn't say that Albania has had a Muslim majority for the last 300 years of Ottoman rule, but for the last 300 years from today, i.e. the 1700s. Which agrees with what you have written in the Islamization of Albania article. So it's incorrect to state that Albania had Muslim majority for the last 300 years of Ottoman rule. In fact, according to what you yourself wrote in Islamization of Albania, Albania has had Muslim majority only since the late 1700s, so only the last 150 years of Ottoman rule. How about we just omit the whole "last 300 years of Ottoman rule", and just write "As a result of 500 years of Ottoman rule, Albania has been more influenced by Turkish culture than any other area in the Balkans." Khirurg (talk) 02:35, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

No problems remain. First its Piro Misha (since you said you consulted the source) an Albanian critic of sorts who wrote that chapter in a edited book by Schwanders. Secondly that whole paragraph has as its cut off point as 1912. There is nothing in that indicating that it refers to post 1912. Also in the Islamisation article i didn't use Misha for the initial contents precisely because of his language of "perhaps" and other guesswork terminology he uses. I only used in him in that article in the Legacy section about Albanians from the elite citing views about the Ottoman empire that has influenced the public debate. Remember you added Misha to this article. I am well aware of when Islamisation occurred. With the Misha source you can't omit the 300 years bit while keeping the bit you like about the influence of Turkish culture. Either its all in or all out or the sentence can be replaced with source/s based on academic research on the topic instead of sources using weasel words like "perhaps".Resnjari (talk) 03:01, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

I disagree on Khirurg proposal of "omit the whole last 300 years of Ottoman rule". I see both sources use the 300 years wording. If we have in mind that circa 100 years passed since Ottoman rule and that Ottoman rule lasted about 500 years, both estimatives point somewhere between 1600 and 1700. Knowing that these processes usually happend gradually, I propose a mid term, and something both authors seem to point out and indirectly agree on, which is that the shift in majority happened somewhere in middle of this 500-years Ottoman occupation period. Ottoman occupation lasted between 1400 and 1900, Misha points to 300 years before 1912 when Ottoman occupation ended, so it would be 1600, while Medjanova point to 300 years since now, roughly 1700. What both have in common is that either 1600 and 1700 are close to the mid-point of Ottoman occupation. So a wording expressing the idea that "It was roughly during middle of the Ottoman rule, in the 17th century, that there is a religious shift and Muslim population became a majority ever since in Albania" would be correct and even sourced by both. Not necessarily in this words, of course, but I hope I helped with the sugestion. FkpCascais (talk) 04:32, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Remember that it is actually more about getting the idea and correctly interpreting and contextualizing and the source, than really about citing verbatin the words. Cheers, FkpCascais (talk) 04:40, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

@Resnjari. The sentence can go. It seems Misha is not the best of sources. Either way I don't feel especially strongly about this. Khirurg (talk) 05:03, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

@Khirurg: with the Islamization of Albania article i made sure to look into the profile of each scholar i used in the main body to avoid these kinds of issues and to make sure they are scholars and not something else. Misha is good when it comes to writing about the post-1992 era (his biggest strengths), his critiques of the mafia like parts of the Albanian elite and government. I'm going to try and salvage that sentence anyway but later tonight, as i have things to attend to now at 4pm and this will require re-reading sources, as i have a few in mind. It will mean the removal of Misha, the addition of someone else like Merdjanova, which will stay. Best.Resnjari (talk) 05:15, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

I think the quote should be removed. It is a personal opinion by the author that can hardly be verified and by putting it here we are giving it an undue weight. How can it be measured that it is the "most Turkish influenced country"? While many of you here are mentioning the nominal Muslim majority, but generally Albanian society according to many polls is secular and one of the least religious in the world. The way the it written implies no change for the last 100 years. Vargmali (talk) 07:38, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

These few days I haven't had the time to address it. I'll deal with it. Best.Resnjari (talk) 20:24, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

 Done.Resnjari (talk) 20:24, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Typo

Under the section "Infrastructure" and sub-section "Energy" there is a typo.
The sentence reads "The planned Trans Adriatic Pipeline, a major trans Adriatic Sea gas pipeline, will delivers natural gas from Azerbaijan to Albania and Western Europe through Italy and will be completed in 2020."
I believe that the word "will", should be the word "which" in this context.
--HelloMrCameron (talk) 22:55, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 October 2018

change to 46.252.36.236 (talk) 14:21, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done Why? Fish+Karate 09:38, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

References

Maps again

Khirurg while I am not categorically against placing the language-religion map in another place, this is by fact a contravention of the ceasefire/compromise accepted on RSN last year. As such it requires discussion and acceptance from those involved. Pings to others who were involved in the agreement: SilentResident Resnjari Alexikoua Ktrimi991. Not pinging the other (all Albanian: Vargmali, BesART, AceDouble; there are some others I forgot the names of as I don't see them much, no offense) ones who were involved in the January dispute or later disputes about the maps that didn't participate in this agreement.--Calthinus (talk) 17:54, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

As far as I recall there was no agreement on where the map should be placed, so there is no "contravention" of anything. Anyway, this is extremely trivial and petty, as all I did in effect was just switch the order of the maps, with the census map now placed second and your map third. Also, please be clear on where you stand. "while I am not categorically against" means nothing. Khirurg (talk) 17:58, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Also, having all 3 maps sequentially in the same section created a huge white space that disfigured the article. It's still there now, just smaller. I'm minded to move one of the two maps to the left side. Khirurg (talk) 19:13, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

The agreement is that the maps must be "side-by-side". Moving one to the left is okay to me. Left/right is side by side as I see it, at least. Moving one to another section without agreement from all the editors party to the agreement is starting to venture into dangerous waters, which imo is not in the interest of any of the six of us. But I am speaking only for myself here.--Calthinus (talk) 21:17, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

"Side by side"? Said who? First, where is that agreement, can you provide a link? Second, side by side is impossible, as there are three maps. And third, do you think that huge white space is ideal? Khirurg (talk) 23:51, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

No I don't think white space is ideal, and I have removed it. It's from the RSN. It was the compromise (or uh... "ceasefire") proposed by the others (non-Balkan editors), SilentResident and Resnjari agreed to it, I agreed to it, Alexi agreed with it, and I guess... Ktrimi991... went along? Idk. Looking at the thread again (it's long...) you seem to have to left before people moved past calling each other names, after lobbing some real fluffy and cuddly adjectives at myself. So maybe you missed it, in all fairness to you. And yeah, great times. Let's not repeat them. I have honorably enforced the compromise and reverted various attempts at removals, by Albanians, of Alexi's map (which no, I do not think is good, but it was necessary to do). Please respect it too. Cheers. --Calthinus (talk) 05:03, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

The consensus concerned 2 maps, not 3. The one about the disputed '11 census was not even part of the discussion that lead to the concsnsus.Alexikoua (talk) 14:26, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Alexikoua Correct. However the version with the census map, including the caption that it was disputed -- which I have supported -- was the consensus version for this page. But, I can agree to move the... troubled... census map to the Demographics section (keeping the caption). Of course it's problematic also for omitting Bosniaks, Armenians, and failing to acknowledge "Macedonians" who in some cases actually have diff identities (Bulg., Gorani, "Slavophone Albanian", Gollobordas, Prespar, "Aegean"... it's never simple, same shit with their cousins in Greece historically of course). Entaksei ya sas? Dhe ty Ktrimi991, and Khirurg? Come a few years we'll have a new and hopefully better one.--Calthinus (talk) 15:47, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Well, at a minimum, the maps should be the same size, and currently they are not. Also, please don't attack me in your edit-summaries, I'm not following you around, Kosovo has been on my watchlist for years. Khirurg (talk) 16:03, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay -- sorry, my bad, I have never seen you on that page, and really didn't expect you to independently reinstate the edits of a self-portrayed "Kekistani", I think we can both agree you're more cosmopolitan than that :). Current version work?--Calthinus (talk) 16:10, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

No, it's not. It makes no sense to have the census map of minorities outside the minority section. The opening of the Demographics section is not about minorities or ethnicity. Previous version was better. Khirurg (talk) 16:19, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

@Calthinus: The part of the Demographics section before the Minorities sub-section is not about ethnic groups. Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:43, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Ok so then the two of you are in agreement... back to status quo version, as per this page's consensus (the 3) and the RSN (the 2)?--Calthinus (talk) 18:40, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

The page should revert to the stable version of the page prior to @Khirurg's changes as there was no consensus for shrinkages or other such like changes.Resnjari (talk) 18:55, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

@Resnjari: Khirurg tried to do some changes but was reverted. Calthinus made the changes you are referring to. I do not fully understand what is the difference because I am accessing Wiki on the phone. Anyhow, the size of the two pics does not affect the neutrality of the article. Make the reverts if you wish to keep the previous version. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:13, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Whatever I did involving the failed compromise attempts with Alexi/Khirurg can be reverted under CONSENSUS.-Calthinus (talk) 01:03, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

The layout of the maps was fine prior to Moxy's edits on the 24th of September. This whole matter was initiated after those edits to which not all editors agree to [2] happened. Prior to the 24th of September, the previous version which had held for many months maintained the peace.Resnjari (talk) 19:02, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. Khirurg (talk) 19:04, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Minority section!

What do you think if we move the informations from the "Minorities" section to a separate new article? I think that it may be too long for the length of the "Demography" section. Thanks! --Lorik17 (talk) 20:38, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

The creation of an article dedicated to minorities is not a bad idea. However, removal of any information on minorities from this article is out of the question. Khirurg (talk) 20:47, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Why out of the question ? I think that this section is rather inappropriate for this article but anyways, thank you in advance!--Lorik17 (talk) 20:56, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

There is nothing "inappropriate" about the section, all countries have minorities and all country articles have a section on minorities. But if it's really length you are concerned about (let's pretend), I can think of several areas where one could make cutbacks that would improve the article, such as in the History section. Have a nice day. Khirurg (talk) 21:11, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Khirurg Actually all Balkan countries I checked do not have a "minorities" section -- Greece, Serbia, Macedonia (surprisingly, given this is the country with the largest minorities), Bosnia, Croatia, Bulgaria… Iaof2017 While I get where you're coming from here, frankly I'm not willing to fight about this. And Khirurg is right, there is no way you will be able to remove the section-- speaking as someone who knows how these things end up -- and I highly advise you not to try it. You've been doing well expanding projects like Biodiversity of Albania, geography articles and the like. Albania's rich natural environment deserves still more expansion -- it has the most cases of species surviving there but extinct elsewhere in Europe. Keep that up.--Calthinus (talk) 04:18, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

First of all thank you for the answers, i totally agree with you guys and i honestly don't want to make any edits on this section or delete something but i compared the article with other countries and noticed that they don't have a minority section, therefore i thought its better to replace the informations in a new article but i can see that is not possible and yes ..--Lorik17 (talk) 13:38, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Diaspora

That Albanians have moved to Greece since the Middle Ages is pretty simple to accept. If a persuasive rationale is not provided, the removed part will be restored again. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:44, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

They didn't move "since" the Middle Ages, the moved during the Middle Ages. The problem though is that the articles states they moved to escape the Ottoman conquest, which is not the case for the ancestors of the Arvanites. They moved for other reasons. So it's incorrect to say that "Albanians moved to Greece in the Middle Ages to escape the Ottomans". It is also nonsensical, since Greece was part of the Ottoman Empire at the time, unlike Italy. Khirurg (talk) 20:52, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

The Albanian diaspora has been formed since the Middle Ages, when they emigrated to places such as Italy, especially in Sicily and Calabria, and Greece to escape either various socio-political difficulties or Ottoman conquest of Albania. Thus, the article gives two alternative reasons. Only one of them is for Greece. If your concern are the reasons, we can modify them. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:57, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

On second thought, I think that's fine. I had missed the "either". Never mind. Khirurg (talk) 20:59, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

This could be solved by changing the wording to something like this: The Albanian diaspora has been formed since the Middle Ages, when they emigrated because of the Ottoman conquest of Albania to places such as Italy, especially in Sicily and Calabria, and also Greece and other regions to escape various socio-political difficulties in Albania of that period. FkpCascais (talk) 21:04, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

I am happy we agree on this. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:05, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

@FkpCascais: We edited in the same time and I did not read your comment before posting my latest one. One good version could be by adding Croatia/Dalmatia as another place where many Albanians moved to in the Middle Ages. The Albanian diaspora has been formed since the Middle Ages, when they emigrated because of the Ottoman conquest of Albania to places such as Italy, especially in Sicily and Calabria, Greece and Dalmatia to escape various socio-political difficulties in Albania of that period. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:10, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

No problem at all, I undestood that. Well... yes... I was just writting a comment to mention that Albanians probably since that time also moved to North as well. Not only Dalmatia, but towards Niš as well, and inner Serbia, as far as Wallachia actually. But I guess mentioning emigration towards that direction is not popular because of your tendency to suggest that Albanians in those regions are autochtone, and not emmigrants. FkpCascais (talk) 21:17, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Albanians in Serbia and Serbs in Albania are not diaspora. Albanians in Croatia are diaspora. The word "autochtone" means nothing. It is just a wrong nationalistic concept. After all, Indo-Europeans immigrated to their current territories rather lately. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:22, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

References

Communism

First sentence of 'Communism' section reads "In the aftermath of World War I and the defeat of Nazi Germany..." Surely that should be WW2? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.30.196.167 (talk) 10:46, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Oh thanks, I accidentally didn't noticed it; i fixed it!--Lorik17 (talk) 12:06, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 October 2018

GDP (per capita) 2018 estimate 13330 USD</ref> 79.106.209.167 (talk) 14:15, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done It is unclear what do you want to change. Please use the format of "change X to Y" ―Abelmoschus Esculentus 03:20, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

The article is becoming a turistic brochure

Recently several editors have been rewriting the entire article. Since the article seems to lack much atention and is not found in many editors watchlists, the changes are passing unchecked and unopposed. It is clearly Albanian editors doing the changes and honestly, making the article look like a turistic brochure. All positive aspects are highlighted, and negative disguised or removed. Mentions of Serbia or Yugoslavia, a neighbour of Albania with almost continuos influence in Albania for centuries, are removed, or replaced by negative connotations. The history is being rewriten. While scholars for instance say:

"Prior to this [Ottoman conquest], they [Albanians] were organised along simple tribal lines, living in the mountainous areas of modern Albania (from Kruje to the Sar range).[55] Soon, they expanded into a depopulated Kosovo,[56] as well as northwestern Macedonia, although some might have been autochthonous to the region.[57] However, Banac favours the idea that the main settlers of the time were Vlachs.[48]"

Our article here completely fails to present this aspect, and insted, the editor pointed out only the positive aspects and tries to leave an impression of Albanian continuos statehood back in Middle Ages. Specially stricking is the adition of:

"After the weakening of the Byzantine and Bulgarian Empire in the 13th century, the area was captured by the Venetians and Serbs that in turn destroyed or weakened notable cultural centers in Albania.[41]"

So, in 13th century, Albanians had notable cultural centers which barbatic primitive Venetians and Serbs weakened and destroyed? I really don´t want to sound mean, but may I ask which Albanian cultural centers were weakened or destroyed by Venetians and Serbs? The editor is intentionally writing and cherry-picking words in a way to always leave a positive connotation to Albania and negative to Serbia. Another exemple is the way he refered to the Illyrian tribe of the Ardiaei:

"One of the most powerful tribes that ruled over modern Albania was the Ardiaei. The Ardiaean Kingdom reached its greatest extent under Agron, son of Pleuratus II. Agron extended his rule over other neighboring tribes as well.[34] "

The carefull choice of words makes one unfamiliarised to think that they were some prior reencarnation of Albanians, and were so powerfull that ruled over the neighbours. However, if one actually reads about them, discouvers that they were centered in modern-day Montenegro, and that modern-day Albania was just one of the many surroundiing teritories they ruled over. That is fixed now, but it is just an exemple of what is happening.

Serbian presence in the Medieval Ages is limited to two mentions, one negative (mentioned above) and the other being one sentence saying Serbian empire wresled control over Albania between 1331 and 1355. When the fact is that after Byzantines and Bulgarians, Serbs held control over most of nowadays Albania until Ottomans. The exception were the Venetian enclaves on the cost such as Durres or Shkoder. I tried to expand this a bit by adding scholarly sourced content refering to the fact that at the Battle of Kosovo Albanians had a contingent fighting in each side. My contribution was deleted with edit summary saying Rv misrepresentation of the source and ce. The battle of Kosovo was just one of many battles that helped Ottoman rule in Albania. Most historians agree that Kosovo battle was decisive for the faith of Central and Western Balkans. Treating as just one of many thus unworth mention seems incorrect to me. Albanians didn´t participate in that much major battles in Middle Ages, so being active part of both sides at Kosovo, which was one of the major and most famous battles in Medieval Balkans, deserves mention. It also depicts the division which existed between the opposition and support of Ottomans at that moment. Also, it happened in Kosovo, a territory Albanians perceve as their cultural and ethnic space, so the only reason for the removal seems to be that the event makes reference to Serbs, thus it is undesired.

This article definitelly needs atention and rewriting in a neutral manner. Editors are evidently trying to give the best image of their country, but that is a problem because Wikipedia is an encyclopedic project, not a turistic brochure. FkpCascais (talk) 18:48, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Another exemple can be seen here:

"Few years after the dissolution of Arbanon, Charles of Anjou concluded an agreement with the Albanian rulers, promising to protect them and their ancient liberties. In 1272, he established the Kingdom of Albania..."

You know what a ruler is, right? Of cause you do, that is why you used the word. Again, not wanting to be mean, may I ask What did they ruled? Who did they ruled? There was lots of them? Who were they? That doesn´t go along with academic historiography. I don´t recall ever reading references to them as rulers. I do recal them being refered to as clan chiftains, local leaders, and so. The history section seems like a narration of cherry-picked related and semi-related events, full of this sort of "minor mistakes" that doesn´t seem unintentional, but rather POV editing with a clear intention of providing an idea of continuos existance of Albanian statehood, something contrary to how historiographers describe Albanians at that period. FkpCascais (talk) 20:29, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

We should not forget that this article is about Albania and not about the History of Albania and besides that, we can not mention every detail in this section. ((The part with the cultural centers is given in the source ((http://countrystudies.us/albania/15.htm)(i originally didn't added this source)))) and i don'T want to attack you personally and with all respect, nobody tries here "to always leave a positive connotation to Albania and negative to Serbia" ... i think you have a completely different problem but as i said and think we can't add everything on this section! ... PS: recently i did some edits on this section with the intention to keep this section as short as possible, despite the given content, because i've noticed that the history sections of other countries were kept very short ...--Lorik17 (talk) 22:27, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

(edit-conflict) Continuing, the Kingdom of Albania (medieval), which was not independent, not even ruled by any Albanian, rather just an atempt by the Anjous to create a base from where they could spread Catholicism in the region, and for most its existance located just in Durres and surroundings, with just episodes of expansion further besides that, is presented without mention of its real size, but instead, so conveniently to allege some grandiosity, it mentions the areas they claimed. The entire composition is made in a way that a reader thinks that there was a Kingdom of Albania, as sort of some Albanian state, when in fact it gathered very little of Albanian population, with the most living within Serbian and Byzantine domains, which are ignored. Even the name "Kingdom of Albania" is missleading, a "kingdom" ruled by non-Albanians, focused in spreading at that time a non-Albanian religion. Basically, a Sicilian colony just using the name "Albania" in a geographical way. To prove my point, an Albanian Karl Thopia, who ruled domains under Bizantine and Serbian crowns, came to liberate Durres and kick Sicilians out. You can´t manipulate these events and present Anjous occupation of Durres as sort of Albanian independence and statehood.

Serbia is mentioned only because I had to add that Serbian Empire ruled most of Albania. Even so, my edit was changed, word ruled intentionally replaced by "wrestled control" and my source, which was an academic book, removed so it stays unsourced, waiting for the opotunity to be removed. Serbia ruled over much land claimed nowadays to be ethnic-Albanian for long periods before the Ottomans, not at all just the period of the Empire. Not only you want to ignore that, but even the Empire period to reduce to minimums. The clear bias towards Serbs makes you want to remove any mention of them. But have you ever question why Skanderbeg entire family had Serbian names and practice Orthodoxy? Why his father and him fought along Serbs at several ocasions against commun enemies? Your Albanian national hero. Obviously because much of the Albanian-populated areas were under Serbian rule and cultural influence. Your denial of this is practically the denial of Skenderbeg Albaniassles. If you don´t want to understand the reasons behind this you are basically claiming Skenderbeg family just loved Serbian movies and they gave Serbian names to their children because of their favourite characters from the Serbian movies. Well no, there were no movies back then. Skanderbeg family used Serbian names, practiced Orthodoxy, and spoke Serbian, because much of the Albanians at that time lived within territories under direct, or indirect, Serbian rule. And no, it was not like a flash-short accidental event, but lasted long, so long that Skanderbeg family even adopted Serbian names and traditions. So you can hate Serbia as much as you want, but I will bring sourced content here to the talk-page of edits I propose to be made, and I hope to see at least an effort of objectivness. FkpCascais (talk) 22:54, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

(Answeing you) Yes, but you are cherry-picking events and writing them in the most favourable way, ultimatelly giving a totally wrong impression of what historiogaphy, when concise, refers to Albanians and their history. FkpCascais (talk) 23:11, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

It is mind-boggling to try to figure out what you aim to accomplish here, other than provoking people. Serbia has some history of suzerainty in Albania. For like, a century or so. Short, compared to much longer Illyrian, Greco-Roman, -- and even Bulgarian, Byzantine and Ottoman periods. What you see as a "clear bias toward[sic] Serbs" could also be described as acknowledging that Belgrade is not the center of the universe and we do not need to overemphasize the relevance of a century or two of Serbian rule which often was not realized on the ground.--Calthinus (talk) 23:08, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

You don´t understand? Well, to start with, why don´t you answer my questions? In the problem of "Venetians and Serbs", what cultural centers did they destroyed? What other academics share that view so it is legit to be found here in the concise version of Albanian history? FkpCascais (talk) 23:14, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

@Fkp: You are correct regarding the "Kingdom of Albania". That part needs work. Regarding the Ardiaei, see my proposal above Talk:Albania#Antiquity. I propose to trim the section. Regarding the "After the weakening of the Byzantine and Bulgarian Empire in the 13th century, the area was captured by the Venetians and Serbs that in turn destroyed or weakened notable cultural centers in Albania.[41]", the original text was " In general, the invaders destroyed or weakened Roman and Byzantine cultural centers in Albania.", which can be seen in an older version [3]. This was sneakily changed by Iaof2017 [4] with a misleading edit-summary. Feel free to restore the original wording. As for Serbian rule, you could propose something on the talkpage. As long as it's succinct and follows the sources accurately, I don't see a problem. It's easy for POV-pushers to revert you. It's much harder for them to come up with valid arguments against your edits in the talkpage. Khirurg (talk) 23:24, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

This [5] by the way is an excellent source for the Middle Ages section. Khirurg (talk) 23:27, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

(FkpCascais) first of all Skanderbeg is not "my hero" and im German and Greek of Arvanite origin, but i see what your real problem is. I recently noticed that some editors are on their nationalistic move when they want try to make some changings in this article, especially Greeks or Serbs from which i go out. This has to stop, really!--Lorik17 (talk) 23:34, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Indeed, this has to stop. Now, can you answer my questions please? First about the alleged Albanian cultural centers allegedly Venetians and Serbs allegedly destroyed. If you cannot answer or source properly this, providing citations, that sentence must go. FkpCascais (talk) 00:23, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Restore previous wording of that sentence as i can't see anything in that source either stating that.Resnjari (talk) 08:07, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

FkpCascais, i have no problem with the "cultural centres" part being removed .. you are perhaps right and this part should be really removed to avoid misunderstandings!--Lorik17 (talk) 13:34, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@Khirurg indeed, the source you brought is an exellente exemple of how most sources display Albanian history of that period in a concise way. I think proves that my concerns are right.

Yes, I intend to make the proposals here on the talk-page.

Thank you Resnjari and Lorik17. So can I remove that? FkpCascais (talk) 15:17, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@FkpCascais, yes its okay for me!--Lorik17 (talk) 15:23, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@FkpCascais:, i removed it.Resnjari (talk) 15:27, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

OK, thank you. Now, the source Khirurg brought here and (miss)used in the article, makes 6 references to Serbia/Serbs besides being even shorter than the sections of our article here. Our article now makes only one reference for that period, totally underestimating Serbia and its relation with Albanians back then. I understand recent events created high animosity towards Serbs, but you can´t erase and ignore Serbian role in Albanian medieval history. It was clearly not just one short episode of Serbs "wrestling control". We have to properly add to the article the weight given to this relation. So, I would like if you could add to the article several instances found at that source which are not mentioned in our article. FkpCascais (talk) 15:59, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

The first one is to add "The Serbs occupied parts of northern and eastern Albania toward the end of the twelfth century." The source doesn´t imply at all that Serbs conquered those parts of Albania because of "weakening of Byzantine and Bulgarian empires in 13th century" but explicitelly says Serbs conquered those territories "by end of 12th century". Quite a difference there. FkpCascais (talk) 15:57, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@FkpCascais, you can't copy the sentence from the source and insert it in the article !!!! I have changed that in a short and good form !--Lorik17 (talk) 17:40, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

It was changed enough not to violate COPYVIO. FkpCascais (talk) 17:44, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

The final version is enough and good!--Lorik17 (talk) 17:50, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Minorities ({Toomanyimages})

What do you think if we just add this image on in the Minorities section: (Albania majority ethnicity 2011 census.PNG) ..? i think the image fits well with the content of the section and is sufficient enough!--Lorik17 (talk) 13:14, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@Iaof2017:, the matter was very complicated due to events in December 2017-January 2018 and in the end that layout was most stable and kept the peace. Please leave it. Thank you.Resnjari (talk) 14:35, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@Resnjari: ... we have to find another solution because of the template (inserted by @Moxy:) which i think is quite rightly!--Lorik17 (talk) 14:54, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@Iaof2017:, you weren't there during those discussion many months ago which got pretty complicated over maps. Please on this issue leave it as it is.Resnjari (talk) 15:00, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

You need to give a compelling reason why you're not following the MSO and causing accessibility problems in this one section. As I highly doubt there's a consensus to sandwich text between images.--Moxy (talk) 16:14, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

There is consensus here Talk:Albania#Maps_again and here Talk:Albania/Archive_10#Map_replacement_obsession. I agree the situation is not ideal, but it is not obvious how to improve it. Can you make a suggestion? Khirurg (talk) 17:08, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

if we're going to have them they should be big thus readable and up front and centered....like at Luxembourg#Administrative divisions.--Moxy (talk) 20:54, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Well there is no consensus to have the layouts that have been proposed so far. For months they way the maps were in the article kept the peace and the page remained stable on that front.Resnjari (talk) 17:47, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Moxy, ok that suggestion seems reasonable. One thing though the two maps with one on languages and the other on the census are on the right and the other map with yellow shades is on the left. If the three are going to be in the centre as some king of image galllery box some semblance of that earlier layout ought to be preserved, with the map with yellow shades being to the left etc the other 2 from the right to centre. Best.Resnjari (talk) 18:18, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

@Moxy, can you reverse the order, so that the census-based map is on the right, and the "white" map placed on the left? Also, these should be at the bottom of the minorities section, i.e. below all the text. Thanks, Khirurg (talk) 02:17, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Moxy, my reply on this was done after a long day so the left-right thing specified was meant to be right-left. Do as @Khirug suggested. Best.Resnjari (talk) 13:31, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

All OK now? If so next we should talk about the animal collage. it's wonderful to try to get as many pictures as possible but now we have tiny little mini images that no one can see properly. Consistent format and size of the images makes the article look finished, polished and professional.--Moxy (talk) 16:27, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes. As the other images have not been of much interest to me, i invite Iaof2017 for comment as that editor has devoted time on this page on images.Resnjari (talk) 16:47, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

i think the minorities section looks very unprofessional and inappropriate compared to other sections in overall! it is better to move the whole section into a new article because it will always lead to discussions.--Lorik17 (talk) 17:12, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

@Lorik we just worked out a system to make it work (see above discussion). It will be based on the Luxembourg article example. On other images, i invited to the discussion because you have been involved in redoing many of them where as my interest of them in an aesthetic sense is minimal or non existent. @Moxy asked about the animal collage. What are you thoughts on that?Resnjari (talk) 17:38, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

In relation to the animal collage, i removed the multiple image and placed only two images in that section because she was right!--Lorik17 (talk) 17:50, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Agron, Teuta, etc...

I trimmed the history section [6] per WP:SS. This is too much detail for a country level article. The Ardiaean kingdom was centered around modern-day Montenegro, and the people mentioned in the section have very little bearing on the formation of the modern Albanian state. Note that I didn't remove the Ardiaeans even then, I just removed some of the "so-and-so was succeeded by so-and-so", which didn't really add anything to the article and is best left for the article on Ardiaei. Khirurg (talk) 21:58, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm afraid that this section should be trimmed further: description about the vast region inhabited by the Illyrian tribes, how they were called by whom, when was Illyria mentioned last time needs to go, else it offers the wrong impression that Illyria was some kind of Albania's predecessor. There is too much detail about classical antiquity but on the other hand an entire millenium (1-1000 AD) covers only 2 lines.Alexikoua (talk) 22:08, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

The sentence on the Illyrians being mentioned in the 7th century AD belongs in the Medieval section. See my proposal below for the antiquity section and the first paragraph of the Middle Ages section. Khirurg (talk) 22:17, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

First of all, no one is trying to give the impression that "Illyria was some kind of Albania's predecessor", we should mentoin the Illyrian presence in the territory such as for example in the articles of Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia or Montenegro!--Lorik17 (talk) 22:29, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't disagree, however the current section is a bit cluttered. See my proposal below. Khirurg (talk) 22:33, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

I think we should also mentoin besides the Ardiaeas, the Labeates who occured after the Ardiaeas in and around Scodra.--Lorik17 (talk) 22:42, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok, if we find a way to mention the Labeates (shouldn't be a problem), are we OK on everything else? Khirurg (talk) 23:08, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

I'll have to check the difference between your proposal and the current version through the preview mode before I give a firm response. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:17, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. The best way to view the difference is with the diff [7]. Which you already did, since you reverted my edit. Khirurg (talk) 21:22, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

You are not sure because you are not editing on the phone. You proposal here is more complicated than your edit. Re the ancient stuff, I clarified sth in the text which tended to present Illyria as an entity. That part of the article seems fine to me. The article does not intend to connect Illyria and Epirus tribes with the country of Albania. As the article states, the formation of the Albanians as an ethnic group happened in the Middle Ages. Thus, I do not understand why do you think that the ancient stuff is misleading. A serious issue is that it does say nothing on other tribes that were in the territory of Albania in that time (maybe Thracians or Celts). If you are able to add a sentence about them, it would be very beneficial. A question arises. A few weeks ago you passionately supported the inclusion of the Corinthian League to the infobox of the Greece article. You made massive changes to that article but did not trim the ancient stuff. Why should the ancient stuff on Albania be trimmed and the ancient stuff on Greece should be promoted? Just asking. Re the Middle Ages proposal, I implemented it with the exception of the last sentence. I modified the last sentence though to address the issue it had. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:40, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't think the ancient stuff is misleading (nor do I recall saying that), I just think it's too much detail for a country-level article. Barely attested figures like Agron and Teuta are marginal, especially for a country whose formation occurred in the Middle Ages, wouldn't you agree? I would gladly add something about Thracians, no problem there. But I don't think there were significant Celtic settlements in Albania in antiquity. Lastly, I did not add anything to the ancient section of Greece. Someone else did (to prove a point in fact). I did not agree with those changes, but if I reverted, I'm pretty sure it would have caused an edit-war. Anyway, that has nothing to do with my proposal below, which stands or fall on it's own merits, and has nothing to do with other articles. So, do you agree or disagree with the proposal? Khirurg (talk) 22:56, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

i agree with Ktrimi991!--Lorik17 (talk) 22:52, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

I disagree. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:23, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

With what? Please be specific. You can't just say "I disagree" and then use that as an excuse to edit-war. What do you disagree with? Khirurg (talk) 20:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

You made a question above "So, do you agree or disagree with the proposal?", and I responded "disagree". I am not involved in a edit war, so refrain that kind of comment here. Re the Thracian tribe, thanks for your addition of material. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:33, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

What part of my proposal do you object to? Let's hear it. Khirurg (talk) 20:39, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

(outdent) I think in general the ancient info is useful and appreciated by readers. It is not very long. It is of comparable length to the corresponding section on Romania. and also Serbia's. For Greece though, we have a much bigger section (which I also think is useful). --Calthinus (talk) 20:33, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Different countries, different histories (especially Greece). This isn't the article to discuss whether the Illyrians were a single people or a collection of people. Also, can you explain why you think Agron and Teuta should be discussed here, even though their kingdom was mostly located in what is now Montenegro. Khirurg (talk) 20:39, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Indeed, Agron and Teuta are relevant topics on Montenegro, just as New York (state) has a whole section of Iroquois and Algonquian history. Feel free to add it.--Calthinus (talk) 20:41, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

I'd like to have an additional sentence on the Roman empire. Calthinus, what content on that empire do you think would improve the coverage of the article? Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:42, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@Calthinus: No, I meant why you think Agron and Teuta are relevant to this article. @Ktrimi: A sentence can be easily added. But can you be a little more specific? Also, that is not a reason to revert the rest of my proposal. Khirurg (talk) 20:45, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@Khirurg: In the height power of Teuta's state, it had conquered areas covering most of Albania's coast, including holding Buthrotum -- relevant. Also, Shkodra was a capital so this is relevant for both Montenegro and Albania.

@Ktrimi991: It's hard to pick out one thing in particular for the Roman Empire in Albania. Here are some things that are relevant and could be mentioned:

1. . The Via Egnatia
2. . Christianization.
3. . Romanization especially along the Via and in coastal areas seen with Latin inscriptions blablabla
4. . Soldiers from the Balkans including Albania sent all over the Empire
5. . Augustus studied as a young man in what is now Albania
6. . Wherever Albanians were located at the time, it was somewhere in the Empire, and the Albanian language was so heavily Latinized that the core vocabulary became more Latin than native -- can cite Orel for this, etc. These are not later loans, they date to Roman rule just as the Romance vocabulary of Welsh, Basque etc do
7. . "Source blackout" in Balkans after collapse for a bit.

Pick and choose what you like.--Calthinus (talk) 20:52, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Proposal

Antiquity

In ancient times, the territory of modern Albania was mainly inhabited by a number of Illyrian tribes. The territory known as Illyria corresponded roughly to the area east of the Adriatic sea, extending in the south to the mouth of the Vjosë river. The south was inhabited by the Greek tribe of the Chaonians, whose capital was at Phoenice, while numerous colonies, such as Apollonia, Epidamnos and Amantia, were established by Greek city-states on the coast by the 7th century BC. The west was inhabited by the Thracian tribe of the Bryges. The Illyrian tribe of the Ardiaei, centered in Montenegro and Northern Albania, ruled over much of nowadays Albania in the 3rd century BC. The Ardiaean Kingdom clashed withe Republic of Rome in the Illyrian Wars. Ihe conflict resulted in Roman conquest of the region by 167 BC. After that the Roman split the region into three administrative divisions.

Seems fine to me.Alexikoua (talk) 23:07, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

References

Middle Ages

After the Roman Empire was divided into East and West in the 4th century, the territory of Albania remained within the Eastern Roman Empire. In the centuries that followed, the Balkan peninsula suffered from the Barbarian invasions. The Illyrians are mentioned for the last time in a text from the 7th century AD. After the weakening of the Byzantine and Bulgarian Empire in the 13th century, the area was captured by the Venetians and Serbs that in turn destroyed or weakened notable Byzantine centers in Albania.

1. The last time mention of Illyrians should be removed, nothing specific about Albania (they lived in a much larger region, not to mention they were a group of heterogeneous elements), 2. the Barbarian invasions affected entire Europe, not just the Balkans that time. 3. Something to add about the arrival of Christianity? Alexikoua (talk) 23:03, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

It don't should be removed!--Lorik17 (talk) 23:37, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

It's ok, but there should be info about the arrival of Christianity.Alexikoua (talk) 12:34, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

We don't want to give wp:undue to Christianity. Islam is the majority faith and has more of less shaped Albanian identity. Sentences about Christianity should be proposed here before any additions.Resnjari (talk) 13:33, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Obviously Albania was part of Illyria so it is relevant. This is not implying Albania was a successor state or any sort of weird bullshit like that-- it is merely part of history, like before nad after, and also stuff like how is mountains and rivers were formed, etc etc; there is not a single successor state to an ancient entity in the Balkans or anywhere west of Iran for that matter. Re religion, obviously for the understanding of Albanian history Christianity is important, however sources are less clear for how it came to Albania (other parts of Illyria -- like Salona -- do not suffice); the spread of Catholicism at the expense of Orthodoxy in the Middle Ages is somewhat better documented. Lastly, and I think Vargmali would agree with me on this, it is wrong to attribute public atheism only to communists, when the atheist movement calling for the abandonment of religion started over a decade before communists had any power and had nothing to do with them.--Calthinus (talk) 16:53, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Yep, agreed. My comment was in light that no undue focus is given to one of the other.Resnjari (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

No problem! But just for info, the first non-religious views in Albania already start in the 19-th century, with Faik Konica for example being very anti-religious and also mentioning non-religious people when talking about people in general. In some ways Communism might even have slowed atheism in Albania, but that is debatable naturaly. Vargmali (talk) 17:06, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok cool -- now it is just up to who wants to do the honors for inserting a mention of either Konica or Toto/Plasari as the founders of Albanian secular humanism in the late 1800s/early 1900s--- sadly I should be off wiki now.--Calthinus (talk) 17:17, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

References

I actually don't understand why some editors try to hide and remove content from antiquity. As @Calthinus said, nobody want to imply that Albania was/is a successor state of Illyria, Thrace, Ancient Greece, Rome, Persia, Egypt or whatever. Ancient Illyrians, Ancient Greeks and Ancient Romans were part of history of Albania and thats fact. I really enjoy reading articles in German language because they try to mention all important facts in a short way and in a very professional way and i hope we can do same in the English article.--Lorik17 (talk) 19:49, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

That's weird because the de.wiki version of this article only has 6 sentences for the entire period from prehistory to the Middle Ages. Anyway, no one is trying to hide anything. If you think something should be mentioned please be specific. Khirurg (talk) 20:03, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@Lorik the successor state comment was for Khirurg. I don't think you are trying to claim that. Some Greek focused editors likely think you are though.--Calthinus (talk) 20:30, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Issues with recent additions

Overemphasizing on specific communities that lived outside the modern country is wp:UNDUE in an article about Albania. Moreover, it's in the border of disruption when this is accompanied by PEACOCK statements such as this one (Cham and Arbëresh have contributed significantly to spreading influences among Albanians within the context of Albanian self determination...) which are also poorly cited. Not to mention that academic bibliography tents to support the opposite view: There is no evidence that Albanian national ideologies had strong support among the local Muslims in the late Ottoman period (in Chameria). Tsoutsoumpis, Spyros (December 2015). "Violence, resistance and collaboration in a Greek borderland: the case of the Muslim Chams of Epirus «Qualestoria» n. 2, dicembre 2015" p. 122.Alexikoua (talk) 17:08, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Pinging Iaof2017 as the editor who added the said content. Alexikoua, I modified the name of this section to make the discussion more friendly. Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:14, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Another issue after the latest additions is while WWII events are much more detailed now the Greco-Italian War is completely absent: the Greek counterattack resulted in 1/3 of Albania being under Allied control for 6 months. I guess it's worth a 2-line addition now.Alexikoua (talk) 17:16, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

It depends. Present what you wish to add here, and we can discuss anything of concern. Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:18, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

In October 1940, Albania served as a staging-area for Italy's unsuccessful invasion against Greece. But, soon after the Greeks counter-attacked and a sizable portion of southern Albania was in Greek hands until April 1941, when Greece capitulated after an overwhelming German invasion.Alexikoua (talk) 21:31, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Looks good, I support this. Khirurg (talk) 22:20, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

@Alexikoua: After which sentence on the article do you want to add that? Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:03, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Just after the After being militarily occupied by Italy from 1939 until 1943, the Kingdom of Albania was a protectorate and a dependency of the Kingdom of Italy governed by Victor Emmanuel III and his government. part. There is enough WWII info in the current version, in particular 3 paragraphs. Thus a brief addition about the Greek-Italian war won't raise wp:UNDUE.Alexikoua (talk) 15:41, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

That sentence needs more focus on Albania, like this: In October 1940, Albania served as a staging ground for an unsuccessful Italian invasion of Greece. A counterattack resulted in a sizable portion of southern Albania coming under Greek military control until April 1941 when Greece capitulated during the German invasion.Resnjari (talk) 18:38, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok.Alexikoua (talk) 11:26, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

error in the etymology section

the etymology section states

"In his history written in the 10th century, the Byzantine historian Michael Attaliates was the first to refer to Albanoi as having taken part in a revolt against Constantinople in 1043 and to the Arbanitai as subjects of the Duke of Dyrrachium.[17]"

so this "history" must have been written in the 11th century ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.90.194.111 (talk) 15:17, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 November 2018

In the Cuisine section, there is a picture with the following caption "Scampis are one of the favoured dishes among the Albanians on the Albanian Adriatic and Ionian Coasts." The ones shown in the picture are not scampi but Atlantic prawns! You should use a picture actually showing a scapi dish. 93.32.64.169 (talk) 20:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: Please make your request for a new image to be uploaded to Files For Upload. Once the file has been properly uploaded, feel free to reactivate this request to have the new image used.--B dash (talk) 04:17, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Demography / population density

In section Demography, incorrect population density. According to the cited information from the infobox on the top, population denisty is about 98 pop/km^2, or about 254 pop/mile^2. Definitely not 259 pop/km^2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.165.96.155 (talk) 12:14, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Flag of Mauritania.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:18, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Encyclopedia of Islam THREE

"Before its use as the official name of the state recognised by the Great Powers in 1913, Albania referred to an area situated in the western part of the Balkans. The name Albania is derived from Arbanon or Arvanon, a region in today's central Albania, which was a term used by Byzantine authors who refer to the Arvanites (Gr.), groups of people living in this area. The Ottomans, too, used this term in their earliest designation of the territory (sancaq-i arvanid). Later they used arnavūt to refer to the inhabitants, and arnavūtluk for the region. The term now used by the Albanians themselves to refer to their country, Shqipëri, is late (emerging only after the fifteenth century), and like the term shqiptar (Albanians) is tied to their designation of their language (shqip), which literally means “to pronounce clearly.” Albanian is the only language that survived from within a branch of the Indo-European languages that separated from the Slavo-Baltic family at some point which can no longer be identified." -- Clayer, Nathalie (2010). "Albania". In Fleet, Kate; Krämer, Gudrun; Matringe, Denis; Nawas, John; Rowson, Everett (eds.). Encyclopaedia of Islam (3rd ed.). Brill Online. doi:10.1163/1573-3912_ei3_COM_23054. ISSN 1873-9830.

LouisAragon, see Names of the Albanians and Albania. The content you refer too has been covered in that article via RS. Best.Resnjari (talk) 17:34, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

@Resnjari: Thank you for your response. That article does indeed contain many good sources, but some of the weblinks used in this page in the etymology section (e.g. "Radio-Skanderbeg.com" and "pinocacozza.it"), are not WP:RS, and should therefore be replaced with proper material. Or at least they should be removed. Its not super important right now as its properly covered elsewhere, but its definitely something that should be dealt with in the long run. Cheers, - LouisAragon (talk) 00:42, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

LouisAragon, that's cool, point taken. Best.Resnjari (talk) 00:48, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Arms of Albania.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:54, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

The anthem of Albania played here, is not the original version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gjergji ai (talk • contribs) 19:28, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 April 2019

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should not be referred to as Protestant because it is not Protestant. It is not Protestant because it rejects Protestant beliefs such as the Trinity and sola scriptura. The text "Some smaller Christian sects in Albania include Evangelicals and several Protestant communities including Seventh-day Adventist Church, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Jehovah's Witnesses" should be changed to "Some smaller Christian sects in Albania include Evangelicals, Seventh-day Adventist Church, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Jehovah's Witnesses." Felix Sonderkammer (talk) 03:46, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. DannyS712 (talk) 04:21, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Ali Pasha Tepelena, Oil paint of Agim Sulaj.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:10, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Historical name of Albania

hey guys, i want to ask you if it is possible or okay to put the historical name of Albania ("Arbëria") on the informations in the top or is there any problem ..? Thank you

No signature; not from me. I do infer that the name is slightly related to map issues.

I do suspect that near the top, near the flag, having a reference to the various maps of outline_of_Albania & having clearer sibling references on various pages Dushku could help enormously, as could improving the distinctions on the map of Albanian_Subversion, which 1953_Iranian_coup_d'état had led me to. Kermit Roosevelt.

Dhsert (talk) 23:00, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Dhsert -- probs not a problem, it's still used in some contexts, like "Caledonia" for Scotland, etc etc.--Calthinus (talk) 02:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Albanian LEK regime

The Albanian LEK is NOT PEGGED to the Euro. Albania has a free foreign exchange regime. On 28 June for example the exchange rate LEK-EUR was 122.65. Far different from the rate cited in the article. Please correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.106.126.206 (talk) 21:20, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit request

To whom it may concern,

I have noticed a few errors within the article concerning grammar in general and in sentence structure, notably in the Demographics and Culture sections. As a result, I would like to edit said specific parts of the article, but, as you will know, it is under protection.

I am therefore inquiring as to how I intend to edit. Should I follow this request up with a list of changes, or how exactly will this hopefully be achieved? ArbDardh (talk) 14:46, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi @ArbDardh: The protection of the article is aimed at IPs, not registred editors with hundreds of edits made like yourself. Have you tried to edit the article? If you have tried and have not been able to save the changes, it should be a technical issue. Again, the protection is not supposed to prevent you from editing the article. Ktrimi991 (talk) 07:01, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

I have indeed tried to edit the article. However, I now suspect that it is probably only due to me currently using the mobile version, as opposed to the desktop version. I’ll see it if works after switching and get back to you. ArbDardh (talk) 09:30, 23 July 2019 (UTC)ArbDardh

About the minorities section

If the estimates of Greeks in the country are 60.000 to 300.000, then why does the article then say that they are almost 1% of the population? That's close to 10% I think, but correct me if I'm wrong. LightningLighting (talk) 22:09, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Sure that's a good point 300k which is the maximum estimation equals to 10%.Alexikoua (talk) 22:13, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

See also: Emigration.--Calthinus (talk) 01:23, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Albania for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Albania is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Albania until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:50, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

The map needs improvement

I have a request: would someone please put a map on the page, which is more "zoomed-in"? It's impossible to see the relation of Albania to its neighbors on the current map.

I recommend an extent from Italy to Turkey, perhaps.

1diot (talk) 01:17, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Why Italy till Turkey. That's a waste of space. The focus is Albania and its immediate neighbourhood.Resnjari (talk) 05:38, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Well the map should have Kosovo marked in some way. No opinion about anything else, I think the scope is correct actually.--Calthinus (talk) 16:21, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Historical name of Albania

hey guys, i want to ask you if it is possible or okay to put the historical name of Albania ("Arbëria") on the informations in the top or is there any problem ..? Thank you

I am not the person who had previously written about Arbëria. That is why I had said that there is no signature.

Please do explain why I am getting an answer to that, then having it deleted, when that had never been my comment. I am the one that had made a comment about outline, Dushku,....

No signature; not from me. I do infer that the name is slightly related to map issues.

I do suspect that near the top, near the flag, having a reference to the various maps of outline_of_Albania & having clearer sibling references on various pages Dushku could help enormously, as could improving the distinctions on the map of Albanian_Subversion, which 1953_Iranian_coup_d'état had led me to. Kermit Roosevelt.

Dhsert (talk) 23:00, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Dhsert -- probs not a problem, it's still used in some contexts, like "Caledonia" for Scotland, etc etc.--Calthinus (talk) 02:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Dhsert (talk) 11:56, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Dhsert, since you're apparently quoting me, could you use {{tquote|}} to do that, so it is clear? Cheers. --Calthinus (talk) 19:07, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 September 2019

the caption of a picture says: The Monastery of Rubik was constructed between 1166.

the "between" should be replaced by "in" 212.166.112.250 (talk) 09:49, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

 Partly done: I have removed the year entirely, since it was unsourced and I was unable to locate a source in a brief search. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:25, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

typo

I can't edit this page, there's a spelling error in the first section:

"concluded the Breackup of Communist Albania "

should be

"concluded the Breakup of Communist Albania "

DlronW (talk) 21:27, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 September 2019

4th paragraph in the introduction: "Breackup of Communist Albania" should be "Breakup ...". Monkeyfume (talk) 18:16, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

 Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:29, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Request for correction

Please fix the last sentence in the first paragraph under 'Demography': 2031 is just the last year in the explicit prediction in the reference, but there is no argument that this would then constitute the peak. Depending on the assumptions, there will either be no global maximum during the foreseeable future, or it was already in 1989. Seattle Jörg (talk) 12:31, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 December 2019

Alinstan (talk) 13:52, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

The HDI section hasn't been updated with new information of 2018 that came out in 2019, please replace the 2017 information with the 2018 one. Alinstan (talk) 13:52, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

 Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:32, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

In the bottom of the climate section I believe the word nonexistent is missing when referring to the low altitude glaciers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AKguy13 (talk • contribs) 09:58, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 February 2020

Main article: Anqituiy in Albania

to

Main article: Antiquity in Albania

Vincethec (talk) 18:39, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

 Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:04, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Request for editing

How can I edit this page? Thanx in advance. Edion Petriti (talk) 16:24, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Grammar edits

The article needs many corrections related to grammar and sentence structure. I will not add or remove any content, nor will I change the meaning of any text with these corrections.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gcjnst (talk • contribs) 21:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:13, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Protection level

As it is almost 3 1/2 years since the page was protected perhaps a lower level of protection could be tried (at least briefly). Jackiespeel (talk) 12:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Not a good idea.--Calthinus (talk) 13:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Some articles do fall into the category of 'issues resolved by a sufficiently long protection pause (which has not been updated)'. The question will probably next be asked when this talk page is archived. Jackiespeel (talk) 10:23, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

That is okay. --Calthinus (talk) 23:35, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 May 2020

Dardania12 (talk) 19:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC) A small but noticeable mistake about the history of the Albania

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Bilingual road sign directing to Glloboçeni, written in both Macedonian and Albanian.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:16, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Albanian Genocide

Is there a reason the Albanian genocide is not even mentioned on this page? I wasn't looking to edit or anything, just came to the page because i met a person from Albania and thought I'd read a bit about it. I am very surprised it is not referenced here. Grumpy otter (talk) 15:03, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Albanians have been subject to various episodes of pretty atrocious ethnic cleansing, but never full blown genocide. You may be thinking of the Armenian Genocide.--Calthinus (talk) 15:05, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

There is no Albanian genocide. Some people from Albania refer to various massacres and other crimes as genocide, but none of them is regarded as such in scholarship. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:32, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

There is no reason for this; there was never an Albanian genocide!--Lorik17 (talk) 12:03, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Split proposal

Iaof2017 suggested splitting the section Albania#Minorities to Minorities of Albania back in 2019, but there was no discussion at that time. Let this be that belated discussion. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:40, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

• I support the split. At 91 kB readable prose size, this article is pushing its limits. Minorities of Albania makes for a notable topic and the content here is good. After the split, a summary of the topic should be left to this article. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:40, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
  • I think its time for an update of the entire Demography section in this article; there is to much attention regarding the 2011 Census and its issues. I'm more interested to keep the section like in the article of Australia or Canada.--Lorik17 (talk) 22:04, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
    • Not sure if you checked, but Greece has a very large section on minorities, and also a map of where minority languages are spoken. Khirurg (talk) 18:36, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Also, please note @Finnusertop:, he's not talking about splitting, but removing the section entirely [8]. He's tried it before too, for years. But if we look at the articles of all other Balkan countries, they all have similar or even longer sections on minorities. Minorities in the Balkans are a hot button topic and of great interest to our readers; we would be doing them a disservice by removing the section entirely. If article length is a concern, perhaps some piecemeal trimming would help, and there are other sections that could badly use shortening. But wholesale removal of the section would be a disservice to our readers. Khirurg (talk) 21:10, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support having a dedicated article on this topic makes sense regardless of article size. Constantine ✍ 18:02, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose: A trimming would be fine, but not a complete removal. Moreover, there has been a concensus (multiple times) about the correspondent maps. I see much of data has been added in various sections in recent months that's far less important.Alexikoua (talk) 14:06, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Alexikoua: The question about minorities is a difficult topic in every country not only in Albania. We should keep this article as other "Good" categorized articles with a short description about this topic anyways, the maps are completely unnecesary. If we add the issue about minorities on this article we should also add this on other articles like within the articles of Greece, Serbia or anywhere!--Lorik17 (talk) 14:15, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree with you about the complexity of the subject. However, similar maps are present on most articles about countries. Moreover, about the trimming: I believe that the last two paragraphs (those about the 2011 census) can go, that's almost 50% of the section.Alexikoua (talk) 14:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• I oppose even to the trimming suggested above, especially when you take into account that the relative section is pretty general as it is. For example, there already exists an independent article for the ethnic Greek minority in Albania which is pretty elaborate. The same with the Aromanians in Albania. Don't know about the rest of the minorities, but these two i aforementioned constitute the largest ethnic minorities in Albania and already have their own articles. In a few words, i don't see a reason for an independent Minorities of Albania article existing. Demetrios1993 (talk) 15:58, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Demetrios1993 you forgot Romani people in Albania I'm pretty ambiguous about how minorities should be treated on this page, but a case for a new page about how Albanian society conceives of ethnic/"cultural" minorities is a notable topic, no(?) and some minorities do not yet have their own pages, such as Albania's Italians or its migrant population. --Calthinus (talk) 18:01, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

You are absolutely correct about the Romani people in Albania Calthinus. Very big mistake of mine on forgetting rather than underestimating their presence and numbers, something which is similar for many Balkan countries if not all when it comes to them. By the way, even the small minority of Serbo-Montenegrins in Albania have an elaborate article of their own, so do the Slavic Macedonians who are more numerous than the former. As for Italians in Albania, they don't constitute an indigenous ethnic minority, but they rather have an immigration status from what i know (more about them here). An "Italian community in Albania" designation would be more appropriate for them. Last, i don't understand what you mean by an independent article of how Albanian society perceives ethnic and cultural minorities in their country. I believe most of what relates to this is pretty generic and already included in the current section of Albania#Minorities. Demetrios1993 (talk) 19:21, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Strong oppose removal of any material He didn't "suggest splitting", he deleted the entire section [9]. He's done it before too [10], this is just the latest attempt. This is a pretty obvious and strong case of WP:JDL. And in any case, all country articles have sections on minorities. For example, Greece has a very large section on minorities, including a map of where minorities languages are spoken. While I don't have a problem with an article on Minorities in Albania, I oppose any removals from this article, particularly removal of the entire section as Iaof did, especially considering the current version was arrived after years of painstaking discussion and consensus. Khirurg (talk) 18:05, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Deleting the entire section on minorities is outrageous, even more so if we know that the minorities in Albania have suffered various forms of discrimination and Albanisation over the decades. I do not see any arguments given in the intro. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 20:49, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose removal of minorities which constitute part of the country's idendity, from the article about that country, is the least an unecyclopedic approach. As an editor myself who is emphasizing in various Greece, North Macedonia and Turkey topic areas, I can point to these 3 country articles which mention about the minorities living in them, as a fine example of why Albania's article should mention them too. Plus, the minorities of Albania are particularly notable for facing significant political and religious hardships through the last couple of centuries. Their removal from the article can't be explained by any encyclopedic means; article size is not one of them. For me this is a big no. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 10:29, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

MAPE

Please disconnect the links in Western European Union's Multinational Albanian Police Element, because they're wrong. I was MAPE's Head of Finance, the correct name is Multinational Advisory Police Element, and connections to the Albanian Police are entirely inapprioriate. It would also be appreciated if the capitalisation in the Organisation's title be respected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.213.9.109 (talk) 15:07, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Albania from late antiquity to early Middle Ages

Various authors have mentioned Albania and the Illyrians in their works, from late antiquity to the early Middle Ages, among them:

• Hecataeus of Miletus (c. 550 BC - c. 476 BC) [11];
• The inscription of Phoinike, mentioning one Ἀρβαῖος (3rd century –2nd century BC);
• The epitaph of Gornja Solnja (end of 1st century - beginning of 2nd century);
• Polybius (c. 208 - c. 125 BC) [12]; In his work The Histories, Polybius reported the first diplomatic contacts between the Romans and Illyrians.
• Claudius Ptolemy (c. 90 - 168), as reported in one of his key sources, the Greco-Phoenician cartographer Marinus of Tyre (1st century) [13]; Ptolemy is the earliest writer in whose works the name of the Albanians has been distinctly recognized. He mentions (3.13.23) a tribe called Albani (Ἀλβανοί) and a town Albanopolis (Ἀλβανόπολις), in the region lying to the East of the Ionian sea; and from the names of places with which Albanopolis is connected, it appears clearly to have been in the Southern part of the Illyrian territory, and in modern Albania.
• Annales Ragusini Anonymi [14]; an identification of Albania with Croatia Alba has been rejected [15]
• Stephanus of Byzantium (end of the 5th century - beginning of the 6th century) [16];
• Procopius of Caesarea (c. 500-565) [17];
• Catalogus Felicianus (first half of the 6th century) [18];
• Chronicle of Joan of Nikiu, in Coptic (end of the 6th century) [19];
• Constantine Porphyrogennetos (905 - 959);
• Suida (second half of the 10th century) [20];
• Anonymous Bulgarian on the Origin of Nations (beginning of the 11th century) [21];
• Generationum et Banorum apud Chroatos (end of the 11th century) [22];
• Michael Attaleiates (c. 1022-1080) [23];
• Anna Komnena (c. 1083-1153) [24];
• La Chanson de Roland (1085), mentioning Albeigne, - the coastal part of Albania etc. [25]. Edion Petriti (talk) 17:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)