Talk:Albanization of names

Albania Mid‑importance

	Albanization of names is part of the WikiProject Albania, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Albania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.AlbaniaWikipedia:WikiProject AlbaniaTemplate:WikiProject AlbaniaAlbania articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merger with Albanisation article

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

No concensus and discussion stale for more than a year. Klbrain (talk) 05:49, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the content of this article already is cited in the Albanisation article. That article is already small (with lots of room for expansion for those wanting to devote time to it) and content from this article that is not covered there could easily be moved to remedy that. Title page from this article should be a redirect for that article. Thoughts from others? Best.Resnjari (talk) 05:04, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support - per WP:CFORK. Half of the content of this article already exists on the Albanisation article that is sparse itself. The added content here forms part of the wider content about Albanisation (and covered by that topic and not being separate) which could easily be copied and pasted to the other article, with the title becoming a redirect for that article.Resnjari (talk) 16:52, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Per Wikipedia:Notability, the topic of this article has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The context would be lost within a larger article which deals with Albanisation of people, not names. Collecting both Albanisation of names and people on the same page would be impractical because the resulting article would be too unwieldy.

--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:18, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Albanisation is a term that covers everything, including people, names and other. The Albanisation article already has at least more then half of the content based in this article using the same sources you used here, with slightly different wording of the sentences. Wikipedia does have guidelines on content forking (WP:CFORK) after all. Incorporation of what is not in the Albanisation article can easily be done through a transfer of information via copy and paste of text with page and its title becoming a redirect.Resnjari (talk) 23:55, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's an interesting subject and it can be further expanded. I suggest to wait a couple of weeks before taking any initiative of this kind.Alexikoua (talk) 21:27, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is an interesting subject, as long as the source material is scholarship or from credible sources and meets the requirements of wp:reliable and wp:secondary. A few weeks is fine. Anyway input from other editors is needed as well before proceeding.Resnjari (talk) 23:55, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is important to bear in mind that in many cases Albanisation of names ≠ Albanisation (linguistic or cultural assimilation). Take for example decrees of the Communist Party of Albania to change religious names of both non-Albanians and Albanians into newly forged "Albanian/Illyrian names". Many of the affected people were already assimilated into Albanians, so Albanisation of their names was not Albanisation. On the other hand, such Enver Hoxha forgered "Albanian/Illyrian names" are not actually real Albanian names. In reality, it was the opposite. The religious (predominantly Muslim) names traditionally given to Albanians for centuries were replaced with a forgery. All RS refer to this actions as Albanisation of names, but I would not be surprised if this actions soon became known as Dealbanisation of names. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:50, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Look, no one is contesting the content of this article. To reiterate, half the content here is already on the Albanisation article (and this article is WP:CFORK). That article is sparse and one which you have contributed to. This article which remained in your sandbox for some years without any extra additions was also sparse. Even with recent additions, its still sparse. No one disagrees that Albanisation is not a notable topic in scholarship, but it comes collectively under the topic Albanisation, not some sub category of sorts. This article looks more like a premature split on an article which did not require it (WP:SPLIT). On Albanisation, names relate to people as it affects them, saying is something separate is ???? Its why i still support a merger of this article with a copy + paste to the Albanisation article, and this article title becoming a redirect. On Enver and name forgery's yeah i agree and luckily i don't have one of those "new" names. My name is Persian, my surname is Arabic derived with the Albanian i suffix, although some years ago i undid the Titiost era imposed ovski suffix at the end of my surname -a slavisation measure imposed on Albanians in Macedonia. Its happened in the Balkans either way.Resnjari (talk) 07:38, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You completely ignored my above comment and explanation that ... in many cases Albanisation of names ≠ Albanisation (linguistic or cultural assimilation)....Many of the affected people were already assimilated into Albanians, so Albanisation of their names was not Albanisation. I don't have anything eles to add to it, so this will be my last comment in this discussion for now. You are, of course, free to disagree.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:05, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I did not ignore, i replied to you. As i have noted, half the content in this article is already covered in the Albanisation page and this article is WP:CFORK.Resnjari (talk) 16:55, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Add examples of Albanization of toponyms. There are some really interesting cases in Kosovo, including "failed" ones, which could be elaborated on.--Zoupan 01:59, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Most failed because they are new and different from traditional Albanian forms, as even the Albanian population of Kosovo has not embraced them, - as it was mostly a project driven by the elite. This is outlined in the main Albanisation article. As i have been saying,, this article is WP:CFORK.Resnjari (talk) 03:15, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Questionable statement

No opinion on the merger but there is one sentence here that is just flat out false, although cited : "Christian names were overwhelmingly affected while on the other hand, the use of several Muslim names was allowed in spite their religious connotations." Almost anyone familiar with Albania knows this isn't true; if anything Muslim names were targeted more heavily than Christian names (with maybe an exception to exclusively Catholic names). It is almost impossible to find Albanians born during the affected time with names like Mehmet or Selim or Xhelil. On the other hand it is quite easy to find people born during that time named Pandeli, Niko, Vangjel (though this guy is in fact Evangelos), Petrit and Monika, etc. De Rapper remarks specifically on this. The fact that Orthodoxy got off easier in terms of cultural preservation (especially in terms of worship places) during communism has been touched on by several authors in fact. --Yalens (talk) 02:24, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Its what the Greek source said. Alexikoua placed part of the sentence on Muslim names, so i checked it and added an addition on Christian names.Resnjari (talk) 02:28, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But come on, you know it's not true, don't you. Whatever, it is cited after all. I just added de Rapper for now. --Yalens (talk) 02:43, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I know its not, but that editor who placed the Greek source might say otherwise, as the sentence on Muslims was hence placed in this article after the one on Greeks. Had to somewhat balance it out otherwise it come off to POVish. I did after all add a whole of of content on that very issue which you refer too in this article [1].Resnjari (talk) 03:09, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

De Rapper doesn't exactly claim the opposite than the "Greek" author. Some Muslim names with clear religious connotations were paradoxically kept, we are not simply talking about names based on various saints (based on the etymology all above names don't have religious connotations: Padeli, Niko, Vangjel etc.) but about names that point directly to clergy or god. "Hoxha" is a typical name of this category.Alexikoua (talk) 14:16, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Enver promoted Greek names like Aferdita (Aphrodite) and Pirro (Phyrrus) by giving them bogus "Illyrian" or Albanian meanings so the population could adopt them, often that came at the expense of Muslim names considered "backward", "oriental" etc. Very few Albanians in Albania from the mid 1970s onward have Muslim names if at all.Resnjari (talk) 14:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you need something concrete to back this opinion. Hohxa and the state authorities in general would disagree that names such as Aferdita or Pirro were Greek. Even today in Albania there is a general disagreement about their Greek etymology.Alexikoua (talk) 14:47, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As i said Hoxha came up with bogus etymologies. Remember i elaborated on the bit on names in the Albanian nationalism article, that notes the bogus etymologies. Aferdita and Pirro are examples due to their extensive use, sadly even today. By the way its spelt Hoxha, not "Hohxa", just to clear up any confusion.Resnjari (talk) 14:58, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Hoxha" doesn't count as it's a surname. Same with "Prifti" (Christian priest) by the way, which is the second most common Albanian surname by some analyses. It just so happens that Muslim surnames are more common than Christian ones (and some Christians have explicitly Muslim last names that were perhaps useful in Ottoman times). But it was really given names that were targeted. As for actually given names, sure Aferdita and Pir(r)o don't count, but "Vangjel" is from "good angel"-- not religious? Come on. also Aferdita is a great name, shut up Resnjari lol Mehmets, Ahmets, Isas and so on from the 70s or 80s are nowhere to be found (yes there are Sinans and Altins, but these aren't religious names, they're just "oriental"). --Yalens (talk) 23:08, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All Enver did was after 1975 whoever was born they could not have a religiously based name or one that came from a certain religious community. People born before retained their names and many are religious. I don't mind about Aferdita (it was just an exmaple), but people ought to be aware of where it comes from :). Enver came up with bogus etymologies, state pressure transmitted as social and peer pressure to follow his version of communist ideology replicated through this name thing. He was a nutjob, though many of his cronies and their proteges still walk the halls of power today. Anyway on this article we'll see what other new info people place. As i said before half the content is already at the Albanisation article. Copy and paste of the extra material and make the title of this page a redirect to that other page. Best.Resnjari (talk) 05:28, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lexical cleansing in the lede

The term lexical cleansing does not seem to be widely used and it may not be due in the lede. Even the source that is used only mentions it in the headline and does not use it in the body of the article.<ref>{{cite web|title=Lexical cleansing: Slavic toponyms in Albania (or out of?)|url=http://www.balcanicaucaso.org/eng/Regions-and-countries/Albania/Lexical-cleansing-Slavic-toponyms-in-Albania-or-out-of-47472|publisher=[[Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso]]|accessdate=16 December 2013|author=Marjola Rukaj|year=2009|quote=Lexical cleansing}}</ref> I have removed it (diff), but it may be worth to add with in-text attribution and further down in the article if there are more sources using it. --MarioGom (talk) 11:33, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of lexican cleansing

This article was created with a default American/Oxford spelling style and per WP:ENGVAR should keep that pending a consensus to the contrary. There's no sense of Albania having been part of the British Commonwealth because of the occupation of the Ionian Islands and periodic help vs Turkey, Italy, &c. is there? — LlywelynII 15:33, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian placenames

and Albanian toponyms seem to need content. I get that this article and Albanization generally are focused on general Balkan disagreements over whose name for what gets used, gets precidence, &c. Wikipedia could also use an article somewhere explaining what's going on with (e.g.) Tirana turning into Tiranë at the UN but still being Tirana at the CIA but Vlora is Vlorë and the official Albanian sites going randomly between Himara in the title to Himarë in the running text except also randomly using Himara there too. Absolutely the way Albanian thinks about these indefinite/definite forms needs to be more clearly spelled out and explained. Surely there are some other aspects of Albanian toponymy that would be worth mentioning also.

1 & 2. Potential starting sources? — LlywelynII 15:52, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article not neutral, move the article's name

This is article is not written from a neutral point of view, and is made up of accusations, and is aggressive to the right of internal politics, like other countries in the Balkans have changed place names. The article should also be renamed to Name reforms in Albania. Vannucci (talk) 13:43, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]