Jump to content

Talk:Laskarina Bouboulina

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Old comment

[edit]

Please consider the following:

"As with many national heroes, recent historians have found reason to criticize her. Some charge that she she had Turkish and Jewish women killed for their jewelery and had the cannons defending Naphplion melted down for her own profit"

Need to back up comments with sources. Basic History lesson.

Bouboulinas death when she was shot was istant . she was shot in the head and see had no time to say anything as last words. the ,, help me stand i want to see the sea before i die was said by the actor at the movie but in real history is not true. i visited the museum at Spetses twice and spoke to the people their , also study the history about her death . the people again at the museum few days ago confirmed me that her death was istant and she said nothing at all as she died. John Athens Greece 12/9/07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.75.254.193 (talk) 18:43, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copying?

[edit]

Some text in this article appears to have been copied with few changes from another website. For example, we say:

  • As a result, Bouboulina was twice widowed and mother of seven children, but extremely rich from the fortune of ships, land and cash, inherited from both her husbands. Due to successful management and trading, she managed to increase that fortune, becoming partner in several Spetsiot vessels and building three of her own. Among these was the first and largest warship of the Greek War of Independence, "Agamemnon".

The Bouboulina Museum history page says:

  • The year 1811 finds Bouboulina twice widowed and the mother of seven children, but at the same time, extremely rich from the fortunes of ships, land and cash inherited from her husbands. ...She managed not only to keep this fortune intact but also to increase it due to her good management and successful trading. She became partner in several Spetsiot vessels and in time managed to build three of her own. Among these was the famous "Agamemnon", the first and the largest Greek fighting ship of the 1821 War of Independence, whose construction cost Bouboulina 75,000 tallara.[1]

Since the material appears so closely based on the museum text, it would be better to re-write it in our own words, or attribute it to the source (such as, "according to the Bouboulina Museum...), or simply quote their text where necessary. We aren't concerned with plagiarism in the academic sense, but it's still a good idea to follow academic standards to the extent that it's practical. A couple of good webages on the topic are here: [2][3] Overall the article looks good. However I suggest we try to add more inline citations, and more sources besides the museum because it is likely to provide only a positive viewpoint on the subject. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 17:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good idea. I'll try to do it. - Sthenel (talk) 23:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever I do User:Future Perfect at Sunrise will revert it again and will block me. I have never seen this behaviour again, reverting to older poor version while the article is not POV, or copied, or vandalized. That he haven't made a comment after 4 days here makes me sure that he doesn't care for the improvement of the article... - Sthenel (talk) 09:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last time you tried a rewrite [4], there were still passages like:
she grew up with a love for the sea and loved listening to the stories of the sailors and their talk of freedom for the Greek nation, which had been suffering under the Ottoman occupation for more than three centuries. She was the unchallenged leader among her eight half-brothers and sisters, having a strong, untamed, almost stubborn character, a dark in colouring and with a regal stature young woman
as compared to the source:
Bouboulina had a passion for the sea and for ships. She played by the seashore for hours and loved listening to the stories of the sailors and their talk of freedom for the nation, which had been suffering under Turkish occupation for four hundred years. She was the unchallenged leader among her eight half-brothers and sisters, thus showing from a very early age her strong, almost stubborn character, her courage and her decisiveness. Dark in colouring, untamed and with a regal stature
The only substantial change you made here happened to make the English ungrammatical.
You simply need to try harder. Advice: Just lay the source aside for a moment. Read it, remember the important information, then write down your story from scratch, from beginning to end, without looking at it. Only when you've done that, take another look at the source to fill in any details like years and dates that you might not have remembered, and create footnotes. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greek/Arvanite

[edit]

Arvanites belong to the Greek nation. We will not say that "Someone is a Sarakatsani/Aromanian/Tsakonian hero" but "Someone is a Greek hero...He is of Sarakatsan/Aromanian/Tsakonian origin". - Sthenel (talk) 18:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They may be part of the Greek nation, but their ethnicity is different, thats why we say "Arvanites". [5][6][7][8]. Also at the time speaking (i.e. 19 century), they were called Albanian Greeks [9][10]. Also about Bubulina itself, sources are clear on what she is. I cannot just understand this hatress from Greek editors, towards Arvanites.Balkanian`s word (talk) 18:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:NOTABLE, nationality is usually mentioned in the lead, but ethnicity only when it goes directly to the subject's notability. Laskarina Bouboulina was notable for participating in the Greek War of Independence and for being one of the few women leaders to do so. She is not notable simply for being Arvanite. Of course, the article should mention that, but the Early life section would be more appropriate rather than the lead. --Athenean (talk) 18:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you always read half of my posts Athenean? (I think this is a clear case of WP:IDONTHEARTHAT). Let me say it again: at the time speaking (i.e. 19 century), they were called Albanian Greeks [11][12].Balkanian`s word (talk) 18:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I do not have to say that that implies nationallity.Balkanian`s word (talk) 18:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think your lack of knowledge of English is getting in the way here. Ethnicity and nationality refer to two completely different things. Nationality refers to citizenship and belonging to a state. There was no Albanian state before 1913, so there was no such thing as Albanian nationality until 1913. Before 1913, there was only Albanian ethnicity. And WP:NOTABLE is pretty clear on ethnicity. So I suggest you consult a dictionary and stop wasting everyone's time. --Athenean (talk) 18:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, you do not even know what nationallity is. But ok, as you say: Laskarina Bouboulina was an Ottoman heroine, since she lived in the Ottoman Empire. The same with Botsaris, et.al. lol. Balkanian`s word (talk) 18:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This, coming from someone who can't even spell "nationallity" (sic), and can't even string together a coherent sentence in English. --Athenean (talk) 18:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah thats me! The only problem is that this is not about English-knowledge, but about the difference between nationality, ethnicity and citizenship that Greek editors of wiki have never learned. So, are we ok? Shall we proceed on "Laskarina Bouboulina (Greek: Λασκαρίνα Μπουμπουλίνα, 11 May 1771 - 22 May 1825) was an Ottoman heroine of the Greek War of Independence in 1821."?Balkanian`s word (talk) 18:53, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have time for your journalistic word games. She was Greek by nationality, Albanian by ethnicity. Enough said. --Athenean (talk) 18:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed to Athenean. This is what I want to say. By the way Albanian Greeks or Greek-Albanians is a term that we use today to refer to the Arvanites. During the War of Independence the terms Arvanites, Albanians or Turk-Albanians referred to the enemies of the Greeks, the other side which consisted mostly of Turks and Albanians. Of course Bouboulina was not one of them and nobody used this term to describe himself even if he was Arvanite. As for the "Ottoman" thing, this is ridiculous. This term was applied only to the conquerors Turks. Ottoman Greek would be much better but this is not the case. As for her ethnicity, people from Hydra and Spetses were mixed, there were not only Arvanites but Greek-speaking as well and there is not a common thought about if she was Arvanite. - Sthenel (talk) 19:00, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why? According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies): "In the normal case this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen when the person became notable", so she is Ottoman. As I think is pretty clear, Wikipedia works on "todays words" not "19th century words" so Albanian Greeks, Greek Albanians, Arvanites, et al, should have todays meanings. Bubulina was a Ottoman citizien (as all inhabitants back then), and her nationality of course was Albanian-Greek. Its too clear (and by the way sourced).Balkanian`s word (talk) 19:06, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

pov-pushing

[edit]

There is an obvious pov pushing mechanism of Greek contributors, to add the word "Greek" before the term "Arvanite community". This is

  • irrelevant, as that she was Greek is written in the lead
  • Totally POV, as what Arvanites were has nothing to do with this page.

It is like adding in every page where Souliotes are, that they were Cham Albanians. If this POV-pushing is not cleared, I will undo it.Balkanian`s word (talk) 08:49, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where does it say that Souliotes are Cham Albanians? Greek Arvanites is important for the reader to understand the meaning, because Arvanites can be confused with TurkAlbanians (Ali Pasha etc.) http://el.wikisource.org/wiki/%CE%A4%CE%B7%CF%82_%CE%94%CE%AD%CF%83%CF%80%CF%89%CF%82 CrazyMartini (talk) 20:44, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I see the previous version was also supported by Sthenel (not-blocked), suppose the revert would be justified if Sulmues provides some additional argument.Alexikoua (talk) 19:51, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greek Arvanites seems to me POV pushing too. We have an article on Arvanites, so saying Greek Arvanites, IS IMO POV pushing. I'll drop a line to Sthenel to hear his version. --Sulmues Let's talk 21:13, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greek Arvanites is also used quite often and it's definitely not POV. Note that in her period the term Arvanites was used by the Greek side to denote the Turk-Albanians, but in its modern sense it clearly defines the Arvanites as part of the Greek nation. Both uses look equally correct to me. - Sthenel (talk) 12:04, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article's lead doesn't leave much space for misunderstanding, Greek Arvanites, Christian Arvanites or plain Arvanites, this is so unimportant for having an argument with POV tags waiving. The sentence that follows is much more problematic in my view, why do we need a poorely written snapshot conclusion like this here ? I'll start with the secondary issues. First of all it is technically unsourced, the citation given makes no such comment whatsoever [mixed refs]. Second, the current wording pertains to half-truths, Albanian was the predominant native language of the inhabitants, but in flurishing Arvanite communities like Spetses, diglossia came much earlier. Wherever there's wealth there are increasing rates of literacy and cultural developement, which in our case were implemented through the spreading use of the Greek language outside of the Orthodox liturgy. A rich naval family in Spetses cannot be compared with some isolated shepherds in Southern Euboia of the same origin for example. The following "Orthodox Church" is a rather empty term to what it is supposed to link in the sentence, it mostly gives the sense of a vertical relationship between the religious leadership and the poimnion, if anything "(Greek) Orthodox faith" would be the appropriate wording in this attempt to establish a simplified connection with the Greek identity, since it refers both to a cultural identity and the religious/cultural guidance of the church.

But even if these were fixed, the integration of Arvanites into the Greek people is much more complicated to be summarized in a sentence and this article has no space for more. Religion and the social structures of the Ottoman Empire in relation to religious groups are only the basis. What weight would these have if they weren't co-related with the Greek national movement and the historical reality of the Greek war of independence for instance ? And there are more factors to be considered, like the early lack of a unified Albanian national movement and the later-on weak influence of it among the Arvanites, the "ethnic nation" ideology in the post-Ottoman Balkans and so on. I would have removed it right away, but seeing the atmosphere in this page i wanted to explain myself first. Do i have your permission to remove it ?--GroGaBa (talk) 08:12, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I am concerned, yes.. It has no place in the article. - Sthenel (talk) 10:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

pov-pushing #2

[edit]

Seems we have a new pov concert to change the lead. Especially in this edit: [[13]] the editor says that he didn't know what's the dispute. Obviously we have an repeated attempt to ignore Wikipedia:Mosbio#Opening_paragraph.Alexikoua (talk) 09:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alexikoua please don't make comments that can be easily considered npa violations(pov concert). Aigest is correct she didn't have Greek nationality(she died in 1825) and we all know which was her ethnicity, so saying that she was Greek is wrong. Now I'm trying to make a compromise between Aigest's and Athenean's version although I still can't understand what is the dispute since Athenean hasn't disputed her ethnicity on older discussions found on the talkpage[14]. Btw the article is in a very bad state so it would be prudent to improve that and not edit-war over a single unimportant word of the lead.
Well then according to this really weird argument we have to remove every 'Albanian' that died before 1913. Please try to avoid supporting disruptive ip activity in general.Alexikoua (talk) 09:49, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry you feel npaed, but you are supporting extreme povish views indeed (apart from ip disruption): [[15]][[16]][[17]][[18]][[19]] Alexikoua (talk) 09:57, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to make a compromise between your versions(both are partly correct) and Alexikoua I don't think that Aigest is disputing that today you consider her as Greek, but regarding 19th century standards the status is different. Btw what's the actual dispute that caused all the reverting? Someone reverted even her surname.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 13:15, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually you are 'pretending' that you play the third part, while Aigest has been turned into a revert only editor that never participates in the discussion. Both of you violate wp:mosbio for the usual reasons.Alexikoua (talk) 19:53, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Place of birth

[edit]

Place of birth mention in "Early life" paragraph does not match the place of birth mentioned bellow the main picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Papadi (talk • contribs) 09:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Photoinside 10.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Photoinside 10.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 29 August 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:27, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arvanite

[edit]

It's a little depressing seeing POV pushers hiding her Arvanite origin. Aigest (talk) 13:11, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Laskarina Bouboulina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:14, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of useless spelling

[edit]

I wonder why there is a weird tendency to add the "Bububulina" form while there is already a latinized "Bouboulina" name in infobox. It's definitely a unnecessary addition. Both Bubulina & Bouboulina are spelled the same in English. The addition is completely useless for an English speaker in wikipedia.Alexikoua (talk) 22:45, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well let me explain it to you Alexikoua, Laskarina was an ethnic Albanian and was part of the Arvanite community of Hydra. It is therefore more than justified to add her name in her native language, namely in Albanian. Nishjan (talk) 19:24, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You added an ahistorical spelling, the current spelling is in full agreement with the Arvanite one: even if you put 'u' or 'ou' it's spelled the same. The fact the she comes from an Arvanite community is mentioned in article. Try to familirize with MOSBIO.Alexikoua (talk) 02:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand you removed the spelling of Fan Noli's birth name as he also used to write it during his early years [[20]]. You understand that's disruption. Use only historical names.Alexikoua (talk) 02:12, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Laskarina Bouboulina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:04, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Current edit war

[edit]
@92.88.171.231, 92.88.170.21, and 93.23.18.29: Would you kindly provide alternative sources to Xiradaki and Householder instead of constantly reverting and tagging referenced material as unsourced and needing direct quotations? Engage in a dialogue or I will have to report you for being disruptive.

Catlemur (talk) 15:24, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You could have realized that, though not uncommon, your practice of putting one single reference at the end of a whole paragraph makes sometimes unclear what part of the text the note is really sourcing. It does no harm to add precise page numbers and quotations, when requested, instead of bulk-reverting, angrily erasing tags and bullying others into reporting (for "reference request"???). The quality of the sources is another question, but since you refuse to quote Xiradaki (and her sources, if she cites some), where can we go? You even forbid to attribute her claim about the Filiki Etairia membership, although it is disputed in the very next sentence.
I will list some dubious or at least questionable assertions that could be precisely attributed, in order to avoid to present these as established knowledge, when in reality they are based on weak sources (Xiradaki and Kalogeropoulos-Householder are not academic historians and are not specialists of the subjects + K-H's work is not based on archivial research and primary sources - i doubt it is the case with Xiradaki either). So you will be able to forbid these changes, or allow them.--92.88.170.60 (talk) 15:23, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is a short biography of Xiradaki here, she has received awards from the Estia Neas Smyrnis cultural foundation, the Municipality of Athens and the Academy of Athens (modern) for her work. The book I am citing has been cited by 5 peer reviewed works on Google Scholar, you can find that her other works have likewise been cited multiple times in academic literature. So Xiradaki is reliable in the eyes of academics worldwide but not reliable enough for you? As for Kalogeropoulos-Householder it is a PhD thesis from a reputable university and I am only using this source for minor details. Even when I promoted articles to wp:Good Article status citing PhD theses was not a problem but it is now? If you think those sources are dubious you need to provide a reliable source of your own that contradicts the claims in question. If there is a source at the end of the paragraph (even just one) the claim is considered referenced and its up to you to prove its unreliable.Catlemur (talk) 16:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you won 'good article' labels using thesis dissertations, that's good for you, but guidelines warn that this material should be used with caution ("theses written as part of the requirements for a doctorate (...) can be used but care should be exercised" etc). Here the dissertation belong to comparative litterature dept, not history, and the central subject is "Feminist Alternatives to Documentary Filmmaking Practices". It should better be used to source 'documentary filmmaking practice' rather than an historical article. Xiradaki may have won this or that and be cited here or there, but about Bouboulina, does she cite sources, does she rely on contemporary primary sources and archivial studies? It is one thing to gain recognizance or success for pioneer work or appealing subjects, it is another thing to write sound scientific history, enough to taken as reference for a period of precise thema.

  • Xiradaki is described as a "self-taught historian" in a PhD thesis (Drivas, GREEK WOMEN IN RESISTANCE AND EXILE   p.28)
  • one of the references of the article, Helen Angelomatis-Tsougarakis ([21]), writes that : "In Greece, women’s lives and their contribution to the war of independence stimulated considerable interest early on, initially among other women, but also among others, including amateur historians. (...). However, their documentation is poor, or not easily verifiable, and occasionally there is no documentation at all. Some accounts may be based on oral family tradition, but the emphasis on the heroism of these women often obscures their genuine historical value. Most of this literature is already dated and often of dubious academic merit, mixing documented facts with romantic assumptions, improbable claims and patriotic rhetoric intended to appeal perhaps to a wide national readership." and cites among other books (Parren etc) the "Gynaikes tou 21" from Xiradaki.

So though Xiradaki may have some qualities and be an interesting author, she shouldn't be blindly taken at face value.--92.88.170.60 (talk) 22:47, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I am waiting for you to provide solid academic sources to replace those of Xiradaki and Householder, I've said that 3 or 4 times already. Still haven't seen any.--Catlemur (talk) 15:09, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are still misrepresenting things, as if I were radically changing the article while you were desperately asking for sources. Instead, you are reverting changes as innocuous as "According to X", and you don't allow any contextualization to KH thesis because you trust it as much as I find it lacking in its historical approach.

As always in these cases, it is quite impossible to have sources saying precisely that "this implausible unfounded claim is wrong", just as you won't find no source saying that "JFK was not the best ever foxtrot dancer in his hometown" even if an enthousiast biographer wrote that he was. This is when phrasing like "According to", or a mention that the claim is not sourced in the given reference, are useful to the reader.

I am not aware of any strong academic source about Bouboulina's career. Though there are tons of 19c century (perhaps too 'primary' for use on WP) sources about the actions of the spetsiot fleet (Τα σπετσιώτικα, among others), using them (or using simple commons sense about the lack of descriptions of Bouboulina's supposed oustanding actions in detailed general descriptions of the war) would lean toward original research. But since i didn't fundamentally alter the text nor "replaced X and KH's texts" (as you falsely accuse me to do), there is no "stronger source" to wait for, and you can stop saying in again and again; if the text looks less unadequately affirmative and the reader is given proper indication of the real reliability of the present sources, this will already be an improvement.

By the way while you repeatedly ask me for sources about changes i didn't make, you did not answer my question about Xiradaki's sources, i.e. if she cites some, and which they are.--77.131.3.35 (talk) 11:52, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Problems in the article

[edit]
  1. KH is cited as a source about Pinotsis being emprisoned "shortly after the birth of his daughter", but she writes that B was born while her father was emprisoned; i wouldn't dare to modify a sourced text, but the two sources disagree and one is misrepresented.
  2. Xiradaki disagrees with Kolokotronis about the result of the battle at Argos (failure for the Ottomans for the first, success for the second); there is therefore a need to add some kind of "according to xiradaki", if possible with her source.
  3. how can B be at the siege of Monemvasia with the agamemnon and commanding another ship in Galaxidi in the same time ? (One answer is that the Agamemnon didn't take part to the siege of monemvasia but participated to the spetsiot expedition to the gulf of Corinth and Galaxidi, according to spetsiot 19c historians citing detailed documentary evidence)
  4. the dates for the capture of Palamidi is universally given as the night between 29 november (old style)/11 december (new style) and 30 nov/12 dec (Saint Andrew's Day). So, were did Xiradaki take her date for this event???
  5. the source about admilralship states the Russian delegation arrived "a few day after her death", implying that the nomination would not have been post mortem (it was taking more than a few days for news to go from Spetses to StPetersburg and back) (NB the interpretation that Alexander postumeoudly granted her the title is not in the source, so accusation of modifying a sourced text is pointless)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.158.121.254 (talk) 12:40, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

--77.131.3.35 (talk) 11:52, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Laskarina_Bouboulina&oldid=1212550519"