Jump to content

Talk:Margariti

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

Albanian Name

[edit]

Albanian name is Margëlleç. Margëlleç reference —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarandioti (talk • contribs) 09:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alexikoua and Athenean ok that we put this in the article? I know that Sarandioti is now defunct, but this is properly referenced.sulmues (talk contribs) --Sulmues 18:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A ultranationalist Albanian website is definitely not an acceptable source. Not OK. --Athenean (talk) 20:11, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Now you have a book, not a website any longer.sulmues (talk contribs) --Sulmues 20:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A single (pro-Albanian) book means nothing. Our readers will almost certainly not encounter "Margellec" in the literature: A search of Google books returns only 1 hit for "Margellec" [1]. And for the nth time, Jakup Veseli & Co. are not notable. --Athenean (talk) 21:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect! It means a lot to me and to a lot of others, probably not to you. And Jakup Veseli is a founding father of the Albanian nation, so it is extremely important. I ask the opinion of a third person that is not a greek or an Albanian before you rerevert me again. sulmues (talk --Sulmues 14:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Marcellec is the Albanian name and if your google books give too little, that's not important. And Jakup Veseli was notable as per AfD. In addition please stop using double standards with using greek in Delvine and Himare and "forgetting" the Albanian names for the Cham settlements. sulmues (talk --Sulmues 19:48, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Margariti. 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) 07:25, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

POV template

[edit]

@Alexikoua If you reverted again with unxplained objection like The use of the template is innapropriate i will put the POV template, since consensus has not been reached. FierakuiVërtet (talk) 02:42, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

per wp:BRD you need to present your arguments for your addition here. You understand that simply saying don't revert again can't be an argument by itself.Alexikoua (talk) 02:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My argumentations are all recorded, don't worry. The one explaining should be you:
  • At my edit, in which i added Cham expulsion/Cham issue, you replied by adding Cham coll. with the Axis, as implying a causation relationship between the two events, which is not the case since Greece already started to clean that Epirus. Therefore, this was not neutrality, as you called it. This is called purposedly misleading the reader.
  • Thereafter, to clarify, i added the Population exchange between Greece and Turkey. To which you responded by making up excuses to bury these links at the bottom of the list, such as the alphabetical order.
  • Then, when i specify that the chronological order was to be followed, you replied ok and buried again those links by adding nothing to secure a more neutral view, as you like to call, which is The Greek War of Indipendence and one of the many Epirus revolts. Nothing to secure neutrality. (and even without explaining).
Everybody can see your foul play, which is even more obvious by the way you protested my decision to put it in the History section (which is the first thing people will see when reading anyway). Moreover, you didn't specify why you considered this use of the template inappropriate, as you called it.
Everybody can see it! The one being warned is you. FierakuiVërtet (talk) 04:09, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
wp:NPA needs to be avoided. I added the collaboration article next to expulsion to secure a neutral viewing for the readers. There should be neutrality in the links offered not simply providing links that victimizes one side. On the one side you add Albanian related articles while downplay Greek related ones (Greek revolution or even ). Please avoid inappropriate wording such as foul play. It's not cool. Alexikoua (talk) 04:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
1)Foul play can be used, if i bump into it that. Maybe you should re-read what constitutes a 'personal attack'.
I repeat: anyone can see what you have done. You've just admitted:
'Victimizes one side' This means you tried to justify/adjust the Muslim Cham expulsion, which is purposedly misleading. Because, as you know:
  • Greece had already started to clean Epirus (and all of Greece).
  • There were already tensions between Albanian muslim (muslims in general) and Greeks after they got conquered during the Balkan Wars (which is what this article says)
2) I added Exchange of the population and Partition of Albania, which added neutrality. Instead, you just started to put all sort of history articles just to bury the others. Why don't you add even the Bizantine Empire?
Meanwhile, i myself put Cham issue on the bottom of Cham coll. with the A.
If we want to speak neutrally: the minorities must be respected and not nationalized. FierakuiVërtet (talk) 05:30, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
According to your rationale the article should be planted with the same links according to your personal POV (that point to the victimization of a specific ethnic community, with securing a neutral approach on the topic). Those links you add here and there are also present in the Chams template, so do not add them in multiple sections of this article, even in 'see also'. You crossed the line here.Alexikoua (talk) 19:43, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My last edit summary was added by mistake and I apologize to the editor in question. However, I have explained the revert as my comment above.Alexikoua (talk) 20:01, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am simply exposing the facts:
  • Partion of Albania
  • Greece-Turkey exchange
  • Cham coll. w. the Axis
  • Cham expulsion
These garantee a neutral point of view (that is what you are asking), which is what i've been trying to do (Indeed, i am not removing Cham coll. w the Axis). Menawhile...
The fact that you called it victimization and started to put Ottoman Greece and Epirus (which is a multiracial region since 1200) does not contribute to the neutrality. This is call faul play.
I don't understand what you are doing with the Albanian name, Margëlliç, since it was not my edit.
One last thing, you are falsely accusing in the edit summaries. Stop! Everybody can see our IP, i will report you if you continue maliciously accusing me. FierakuiVërtet (talk) 20:19, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: Aside from User:FierakuiVërtet's edits being disruptive and the account is found to be a WP:SOCK and blocked indefinitely, which for me is a reason to not ever bother discussing with them on the talk page, however I feel inclined to notify here that since their problematic edits stayed, I had to partially revert them myself, and especially the addition of Partition of Albania from "See also" section which had POV-pushing implications since Margariti was never part of the Albanian state, only of the Ottoman Empire and later Greece. Adding the partitioning of a third country there, is to suggest that the village had anything to do with the actual event of the partition. It did not. The only relation of the village to that partition is an hypothetical scenario of the Treaties ending up different, under different circumstances, which still is unecyclopedic, and judging from the actions of the sock, also against the good faith use of "See Also".
Edit 1: I just reverted [2] more of the Sock's changes to the article, as well as an IP's ones. I am not sure if the IP is related to the Sock in any way, but the Sock appears to have suspiciously benefited from the IP's edits. Edit 2: the IP first removes a Wikilink from the main body and that prompts Alexikoua in adding that Wikilink to the "See Also" which in turn prompts the Sock to add even more to "See Also". However using the "See Also" this way is not how it is supposed to be. The "See Also" can not be used as a workaround for the lack of wikilinks on the main body from the moment it already mentions the events, nor it can be used as a means for a Sock to emphasize on certain events for POV-pushing purposes, nor may have Wikilinks added for neutrality/balancing purposes). The second comment edit is due to me confusing 2 revisions with each other and correctional changes can be found here: [3]. My apologies for the confusion. Nevertheless, considering the above developments and outcomes, I share User:Alexikoua's concerns for POV-pushing through the repeated use wikilinks across both the Main body of Article, the "See Also" section and the Cham Albanians template below and I can not WP:CONSENT to this misuse of the "See Also" section. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ (talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 12:40, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Those see also links clearly fall into wp:POINT, part of a desperate attempt to show that this article belongs to Albanian expansionist plans. Although those links are already part of the Cham template he insists to add them in various sections so to overemphasize his personal wp:POV. This falls into disruptive editing not to mention persistent wp:NPA violations.Alexikoua (talk) 16:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cite Error on article

[edit]

@Maleschreiber, the following revision: [4] dated 20:14, 2 September 2022is causing a Cite Error on the article's bottom. I would fix it myself but I am not sure how you meant your edit to be. Can you look at your edits please? - ❖ SilentResident ❖ (talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 15:01, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good observation, thanks.--Maleschreiber (talk) 15:19, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

3rd-grade source needs verification and evaluation

[edit]

Xhufi's dubious (and offline) work needs full citation. It won't be a surprise since Xhufi made several historical errors of that kind (as in the case of Moscopole). For future reference Venetian sources never used the Margelic.Alexikoua (talk) 20:17, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unconstructive removals of content sourced by Baltsiotis

[edit]

Please abstain from removals that reveal an aggresive nature. Baltsiotis clearly states in detail that: Τhe Muslim population of Margariti was against any Albanian movement and in favor of Ottoman side, as such in the summer of 1912 their representatives asked for the extermination of the Albanian national figure, Ismail Qemali. & while the support of the Muslim beys to an Albanian movement was completely insignificant. This is described in detail, backed by bibliography and it is not contradicted by any other source. As such please avoid removing this kind of information.

Baltsiotis also provides additional information about the pro-Ottoman activities during the 1870s-1880s, which should become also part of the article btw. Alexikoua (talk) 04:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another weird part that has been readded is this one: The onslaught of the conquest of Margariti was followed by the decrease of its population of Muslim Albanians. From 1913 to 1920, its population dropped from 2606 to 1803. but the inline citation (Baltsiotis, 2009, p. 182) claims something diferrent: Due to the Balkan Wars developments and the economic decline the population of Margariti decreased from 2,606 in 1913 to 1,803 in 1920., text from the original: Η ανώμαλη κατάσταση που επικρατεί στην περιοχή και η οικονομική δυσπραγία οδηγεί ένα όχι αμελητέο τμήμα του μουσουλμανικού πληθυσμού σε μετανάστευση. ... Μια ανάλογη εξέταση των απογραφικών δεδομένων καταδεικνύει ότι σε πολλούς οικισμούς υπάρχει σημαντική πληθυσμιακή ελάττωση, χωρίς μάλιστα ο πληθυσμός αυτός να κατευθύνεται σε άλλες περιοχές της Τσαμουριάς ή της Ελλάδας... Μαργαρίτι 2606-1803. We should abstaind from unconstructive changes that don't reflect the description provided by inline reference.Alexikoua (talk) 05:24, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by the editsd which were first added by the IP of a banned user, use of baltsiotis is done in an out of context and POV manner. The source should not be removed because baltsiotis seems to be used in many articles, but the full context should be provided. This is something which the IP of the banned user did not do and we should not support such actions. Durraz0 (talk) 16:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you think "the full context should be provided" then by all means do so. Wholesale removal is the exact opposite and very unconstructive. Khirurg (talk) 18:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's quite disruptive to claim that an wp:RS and in depth fieldwork by Baltsiotis is out of context and POV manner. On the contrary we should respect wp:RS such as this one and avoid removals and flasification of sourced content that can be described as a childish way of editing:
Falsification of sourced content
Text re-added by Ktrimi[[5]] & Botushali[[6]] supposedly backed by Baltsiotis What Baltsiotis really states
The onslaught of the conquest of Margariti was followed by the decrease of its population of Muslim Albanians. From 1913 to 1920, its population dropped from 2606 to 1803. (supposedly in: Baltsiotis, 2009, p. 182) Due to the Balkan Wars developments and the economic decline the population of Margariti decreased from 2,606 in 1913 to 1,803 in 1920.

(Η ανώμαλη κατάσταση που επικρατεί στην περιοχή και η οικονομική δυσπραγία οδηγεί ένα όχι αμελητέο τμήμα του μουσουλμανικού πληθυσμού σε μετανάστευση.)

Removal of sourced content:
Text removed by Ktrimi[[7]] & Botushali[[8]] though backed by Baltsiotis What Baltsiotis describes
Everything removed related to anti-Albanian national movements Τhe Muslim population of Margariti was against any Albanian movement and in favor of Ottoman side, as such in the summer of 1912 their representatives asked for the extermination of the Albanian national figure, Ismail Qemali... the support of the Muslim beys to an Albanian movement was completely insignificant.

In:

  • Baltsiotis, 2009, p. 80-81: Ακόμη πιο έντονη ήταν η προσήλωση στην Οθωμανική Αυτοκρατορία και η απουσία «αλβανιστών» στο Μαργαρίτι: Το καλοκαίρι του 1912, οι πρόκριτοι του Μαργαριτίου στέλνουν τηλεγράφημα σε αυτούς της Παραμυθιάς που περιέχει μια διακήρυξη εξόντωσης του Ισμαήλ Κεμάλ. Η προφορική παράδοση μεταφέρει επίσης ότι ο «Δερβίς Χύμα» (Dervish Hima), 327 όταν έφτασε στο Μαργαρίτι για να «προπαγναδίση την Αλβανικήν ιδέαν» απειλήθηκε ότι θα δολοφονηθεί.328 Πράγματι, στο Μαργαρίτι δεν λειτούργησε ποτέ, ούτε υποτυπωδώς, αλβανική λέσχη
  • Λάμπρος, Μπαλτσιώτης (2004). "Τσαμουριά: πραγματικότητες και φαντασιώσεις". Ο Πολίτης (126): 5. Retrieved 19 November 2024.: Η παρουσία μπέηδων με συμπάθεια έστω προς την αλβανική κίνηση ήταν ισχνή

It's erroneous that no contradicting sources have been ever presented so far. The only 'argument' to that direction is that just one local person happened to be among the signatories of Albanian independence. In fact the declaration of I. Qemali assassination is enough important to be added in the person's article too. Alexikoua (talk) 22:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "Bothshali" mentioned by you twice? Is he a new user? Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, you now changed it to "Botushali". I thought a new user was among us. Lets wait for Botushali to say what can be done to readd the content. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:13, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Botushali and Durraz0, Baltsiotis is a RS. He has done a lot of good research on the Chams and is quite useful as a source. The content Alexikoua wants to add is just the tip of the iceberg, though Alexikoua probably has not noticed it all yet (thanks Alexi for promoting Baltsiotis). So guys what do you think can be done to address your concerns with Alexikoua's new additions like rewriting etc? Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:28, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Instead a tip of the tip of the iceberg you are simply wp:IDONTLIKEIT & wp:CHERRYPICKING the same author. This is not productive: selectively using a specific author in parts he promotes your national POV needs to be avoided. Actually Baltsiotis provides extensive descriptions of the anti-Albanian sentiment in Margariti and should be expanded x3 to say the least. Alexikoua (talk) 01:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever on earth you are trying to say. Ktrimi991 (talk) 02:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m not sure what Alexikoua is ranting about here, but what I now know is that Baltsiotis indeed is RS but that the full context is missing here. In the same page where Baltsiotis writes that the beys of Margariti sent a telegram asking for Ismail Qemali's assassination, he also writes that Albanian activists in the town tried to kill the mufti because he was opposed to the Albanian movement. So either include both incidents or none of them - you can’t selectively pick and choose information that makes them seem “less Albanian” to you. Botushali (talk) 05:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment:
    • The first quote doesn't involve misinterpretation of the source as "developments during the Balkan Wars" refers to the military occupation of the area. A small rephrasing might be worked out in preference of some better terms, but there's no misinterpretation per se.
    • the support of the Muslim beys to an Albanian movement was completely insignificant uses Baltsiotis (2002) as a citation: In the kaza of Filat, as witnessed in sources, the movement had been embraced by broader social layers. In the entirety of the kaza of Margariti, the presence of beys who were supportive of the Albanian movement was minimal. The author's argument is related to the social stratification of support for the Albanian movement and should be discussed as such.
    • Τhe Muslim population of Margariti was against any Albanian movement and in favor of Ottoman side, as such in the summer of 1912 their representatives asked for the extermination of the Albanian national figure, Ismail Qemali uses Baltiotis (2009) as a citation: In the summer of 1912, the upper class of Margariti sent a telegram which included a proclamation of extermination for Ismail Qemal to [members of the upper class] of Paramythia. (...) Even though the presentation of archival sources by Eleutheria Nikolaidou is usually problematic, the last one presents a report of the consulate of Ioannina (1910) which mentions all Albanians of the south (referring to Muslims) had been "awakened" with the exception of those of the kaza of Margariti and Preveza and the Chams of Paramythia and Filiates. A year later, the Greek consulate notes than in Paramythia, there is no Albanian movement, while in Margariti a few inhabitants have joined it. They note that there was an assassination attempt from "Albanianists" against the mufti because of the "fanatical" support of the population towards the regime, as conveyed by Nikolaidou, "and the stubborn and intense resistance of the mufti against the Albanian national idea". On the contrary, the same report mentions significant influence of the Albanian national movement in Filiates, the formation of rebel groups, as we saw above, in contradiction with the findings of the previous reports. Baltsiotis (2009) discusses these incidents which come from reports of the Greek consulate in a critical manner and notes the contradictions of the reports. In essence, what is pertinent in the above quotes is that the economic and religious elites were apprehensive of the Albanian national movement and wanted to avoid anything they considered to cause destabilization. It is the default view of most economic and religious elites in the Balkans towards national movements and should be discussed as such without POV statements.--Maleschreiber (talk) 01:09, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Baltsiotis concludes that the anti-Albanian /pro-Ottoman movements and initiatives are widely accepted historical facts in historiography (Ακόμη πιο έντονη ήταν η προσήλωση στην Οθωμανική Αυτοκρατορία και η απουσία «αλβανιστών» στο Μαργαρίτι: [Even more intense was the attachment to the Ottoman Empire and the absence of "pro-Albanian movement" in Margariti] and Η παρουσία μπέηδων με συμπάθεια έστω προς την αλβανική κίνηση ήταν ισχνή [The presence of beys with sympathy even for the Albanian movement was weak'] and even πράγματι, στο Μαργαρίτι δεν λειτούργησε ποτέ, ούτε υποτυπωδώς, αλβανική λέσχη [indeed, no Albanian club ever functioned in Margariti, not even in a rudimentary way]). No wonder this is in line with the rest of the scholaship (Tsoutsoumpis, Kontis etc.). Addition of those essential events that marked the 20th century history of Margariti is warranted. No contradicting sources are provided. Simply removing this academic conclusions from the article of this settlement constitutes distruption. Alexikoua (talk) 01:42, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, we have sources which clearly state Albanians representatives from Margariti participated in Albanian national movements, so your point doesn’t really stand here… Botushali (talk) 05:04, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Full quotes don't support selective use of Baltsiotis (2009). The article should either mention that some beys were against Ismail Qemali and that another section sought to assassinate the mufti for being against independence or none of the two events. As it goes beyond the scope of the article to discuss such details, this section by Baltsiotis (2009) can be discussed as During the last Ottoman period, local Muslim landholding elites were largely apprehensive towards the Albanian national independence movement. This is the main argument of the section.--Maleschreiber (talk) 20:54, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Margariti&oldid=1259183886"