Talk:Skanderbeg/Archive 8
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Skanderbeg. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
Serbian origin theory.
Why were my edits removed? I just don't understand, you just remove it without any reason. It also had sources AND the same sentences are on this page and this. If that many sources are not enough, I will give even more. MilosHaran (talk) 18:29, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Like much of nobility in the Middle Ages, he had mixed roots. His mother was very likely from a Slavic background -- although what specifically that was could probably debated between Serbian, Macedonian and Bulgarian (many of the Slavs even in Kosovo could be called "Bulgarian" in the time period given considerable prior Bulgarian rule). Of course for Balkan nationalists this means they get to claim the national heroes of neighboring (and sometimes hostile) nations as their "own". Obviously this is ridiculous, and this very tribal conception of national identity is one reason why Balkan disputes are the laughingstock of the rest of Europe. Nevertheless, on Wikipedia we have to deal with this bullshit from time to time -- witness also the longstanding Croatian nationalist campaign to emphasize how Nikola Tesla was born in Croatia-- now enshrined in the Hall of Lame, not to mention Milos Obilic (or should I say "Millosh Kopilli" as some Kosovar Albanians wishfully think). Do we need a coatrack section about this on this page? No, we don't.--Calthinus (talk) 12:44, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support inclusion of text about Skanderbeg's Serb origin - Per Wikipedia:Verifiability and Calthinus. I agree with Calthinus that it is wrong to present this person as ethnically 100% Albanian. The proposed text about his Serb origin deserves place in this article having in mind that there is a scientific consensus that Skanderbeg was of Serb origin trough his father (diff). Majority of contemporary reliable sources emphasize that Skanderbeg was Serb also trough his mother. I agree with what Calthinus wrote about Croatian and Albanian nationalisms and how they get to
.... claim the national heroes of neighboring .... nations as their "own".
. I also agree with Calthinus that text about Skanderbeg's Serb origin do not deserve a whole section. A couple of short proposed paragraphs can be placed in section about Skanderbeg's early life. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:20, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Cute. However, there is no such "scientific consensus" and for inclusion such paragraphs will need to be amended to adhere to WP:NPOV on this issue, which there is not a consensus about (on Wikipedia or in scholarship). --Calthinus (talk) 17:42, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- I fully agree with Antidiskriminator. Jingiby (talk) 17:34, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Jingiby I take this to mean you are also asserting there is a "scientific consensus that Skanderbeg was of Serb origin through his father"? --Calthinus (talk) 17:42, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- There are several theories on Skanderbeg's origin, that he had some Serbian, Greek, Macedonian etc origins. This is a similar case to those of many national heroes, and is closely linked with nationalism. A possible Serbian origin of his mother is widely supported among scholars, and I have given that theory most of weight in the stuff about Skanderbeg's mother on this article. On the other hand, a possible Serbian origin of the Kastrioti family has not wide support among scholars, and we are not to present every theory on this article. Otherwise, Tesla, Alexander the Great, Markos Botsaris articles would be a mess. Alternative views on the Kastrioti family's origin are present in relevant articles, if I am not mistaken. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:46, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- I am not shure if there is a "scientific consensus that Skanderbeg was of Serb origin through his father", but probably he had partial Slavic ancestry in his paternal and maternal lines, as well as Albanian and maybe even some Greek. Jingiby (talk) 17:55, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Claims on some Greek origins of Skanderbeg are fringe and are supported only by some Greek nationalists and Arvanites, Greeks of Albanian ancestry many of whom believe that they are modern Dorians. From all theories on some non-Albainian origins of Skanderbeg, the one cliaming that his mother was a Serb has wide support among scholarship. Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:02, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- I am not shure if there is a "scientific consensus that Skanderbeg was of Serb origin through his father", but probably he had partial Slavic ancestry in his paternal and maternal lines, as well as Albanian and maybe even some Greek. Jingiby (talk) 17:55, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- There are several theories on Skanderbeg's origin, that he had some Serbian, Greek, Macedonian etc origins. This is a similar case to those of many national heroes, and is closely linked with nationalism. A possible Serbian origin of his mother is widely supported among scholars, and I have given that theory most of weight in the stuff about Skanderbeg's mother on this article. On the other hand, a possible Serbian origin of the Kastrioti family has not wide support among scholars, and we are not to present every theory on this article. Otherwise, Tesla, Alexander the Great, Markos Botsaris articles would be a mess. Alternative views on the Kastrioti family's origin are present in relevant articles, if I am not mistaken. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:46, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Firstly, Bulgarians never lived in Kosovo. Kosovo was populated mainly by Slavic tribes, read Constantine Porphyrogenitus. The tribes were probably Serbized by 12th century. Dude, it's not fair to compare Nikola Tesla who lived in 20th century and Skanderbeg who lived in 15th century. Milos Obilic can not be Albanian, because simple etymology, "Milos", which means "dear" and "(K)Obilic", he gained that surname through legend that he was born by a mare. There aren't even any primary sources that claims that he was Albanian. Here's the real signature of Skanderbeg that I found in Ragusa's archives, where he clearly knew Serbian language. Sorry for being barbaric and angry and starting war edits. I now just want you to give me any primary source that he was Albanian, so we should we start debate that should we put Serbian origin theory or not. MilosHaran (talk) 01:24, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Jingiby I take this to mean you are also asserting there is a "scientific consensus that Skanderbeg was of Serb origin through his father"? --Calthinus (talk) 17:42, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Secondly, Kosovo was ceded from the Byzantine Empire to the First Bulgarian Empire circa 840 and remain part from it until circa 1015. The development of Old Church Slavonic literacy in the country and the acceptation of Orthodoxy, had the effect of preventing the assimilation of the South Slavs into neighboring cultures, which promoted the formation of a distinct Bulgarian identity. As result the numerous Slavic tribes in that broad area from the Danube to the north, to the Aegean Sea to the south, and from the Adriatic Sea to the west, to the Black Sea to the east, accepted the common ethnonym "Bulgarians". During the 9th. century the Bulgarians established a form of national identity that despite far from modern nationalism, helped them to survive as a distinct entity through the centuries. After 1015 till the end of the 12th. century Kosovo was part from a Byzantine province called Bulgaria (theme). Kosovo was also occasionally part from the Second Bulgarian Empire during 13th. century. The Serbs ruled over it during the 14th century. Afterwards followed 500 years Ottoman rule. By the way, Marin Barleti who wrote during the 15th. century the biography of Skanderbeg, when talking about the inhabitants of the area where he was born, calls them "Bulgarians". With the rise of modern nationalism during the 19th. century Western and Russian ethnographers often displayed on their maps or described the southern parts of Kosovo's Slavic population as Bulgarian. It was part of the Bulgarian Exarchate at that time. For example, the second man into the hierarchy of the Bulgarian Revolutionary Central Committee then - Dimitar Obshti, was from Kosovo. More, an article published in the Belgian magazine Ons Volk Ontwaakt (Our Nation Awakes) on 21 December 1912 estimated 827,100 inhabitants in the Vilajet of Kosovo from whom: Christian Bulgarians - 250,000; Muslim Bulgarians - 14,000; Orthodox Serbs - 113,000; Mixed (Bulgarian-Serbian) - 22,000. By the way, there are still some Slavs who retained their Bulgarophile sentiments. In May 2018, about 500 of them have filed a petition in the country's parliament demanding official recognition of the Bulgarian community here. Stop pushing biased info. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 05:03, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- 250,000 Muslim Bulgarians??? I just wonder where they have went after 10 years. Yeah, Bulgarian Empire controlled eastern Kosovo, while Serbia western, the border was near the city Drsnik. The Bulgaria theme map isn't right, there is no Duklja, there are no sources that Bulgaria theme even had Kosovo in the article also owner of that map even said that it's not accurate. Cite me where Marlin Barleti said that Skanderbeg was Bulgarian. So what if that Dimitar Obshti was from Kosovo? That doesn't prove anything. Bulgarophiles is a term used for people from region of Macedonia and region of Pomoravlje, but where is Kosovo? Not even true that Bulgarians had Kosovo in 13th century. Please check facts friend. MilosHaran (talk) 11:16, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Secondly, Kosovo was ceded from the Byzantine Empire to the First Bulgarian Empire circa 840 and remain part from it until circa 1015. The development of Old Church Slavonic literacy in the country and the acceptation of Orthodoxy, had the effect of preventing the assimilation of the South Slavs into neighboring cultures, which promoted the formation of a distinct Bulgarian identity. As result the numerous Slavic tribes in that broad area from the Danube to the north, to the Aegean Sea to the south, and from the Adriatic Sea to the west, to the Black Sea to the east, accepted the common ethnonym "Bulgarians". During the 9th. century the Bulgarians established a form of national identity that despite far from modern nationalism, helped them to survive as a distinct entity through the centuries. After 1015 till the end of the 12th. century Kosovo was part from a Byzantine province called Bulgaria (theme). Kosovo was also occasionally part from the Second Bulgarian Empire during 13th. century. The Serbs ruled over it during the 14th century. Afterwards followed 500 years Ottoman rule. By the way, Marin Barleti who wrote during the 15th. century the biography of Skanderbeg, when talking about the inhabitants of the area where he was born, calls them "Bulgarians". With the rise of modern nationalism during the 19th. century Western and Russian ethnographers often displayed on their maps or described the southern parts of Kosovo's Slavic population as Bulgarian. It was part of the Bulgarian Exarchate at that time. For example, the second man into the hierarchy of the Bulgarian Revolutionary Central Committee then - Dimitar Obshti, was from Kosovo. More, an article published in the Belgian magazine Ons Volk Ontwaakt (Our Nation Awakes) on 21 December 1912 estimated 827,100 inhabitants in the Vilajet of Kosovo from whom: Christian Bulgarians - 250,000; Muslim Bulgarians - 14,000; Orthodox Serbs - 113,000; Mixed (Bulgarian-Serbian) - 22,000. By the way, there are still some Slavs who retained their Bulgarophile sentiments. In May 2018, about 500 of them have filed a petition in the country's parliament demanding official recognition of the Bulgarian community here. Stop pushing biased info. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 05:03, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Please, write and read more carefully! Christian Bulgarians - 250,000; Muslim Bulgarians - 14,000. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 11:32, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry Slavic bro, haven't saw it, but where they went after 10 years? MilosHaran (talk) 11:37, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Please, check the Report of the International Commission on the Balkan Wars. Especially p. 158. Those who declared themselves as Bulgarians were, harassed or deported. The high clergymen of Bulgarian Orthodox Church were also deported. Bulgarian schools were closed and teachers expelled. All the Slavic population not depending on its identity was forced to declare as Serbs. Those who refused were tortured. The International Commission concluded that the Serbian state started a wide sociological experiment of assimilation through terror in its new territories. Jingiby (talk) 11:54, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- That's Macedonia, we are talking about western Kosovo. MilosHaran (talk) 12:09, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Please, check the Report of the International Commission on the Balkan Wars. Especially p. 158. Those who declared themselves as Bulgarians were, harassed or deported. The high clergymen of Bulgarian Orthodox Church were also deported. Bulgarian schools were closed and teachers expelled. All the Slavic population not depending on its identity was forced to declare as Serbs. Those who refused were tortured. The International Commission concluded that the Serbian state started a wide sociological experiment of assimilation through terror in its new territories. Jingiby (talk) 11:54, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry Slavic bro, haven't saw it, but where they went after 10 years? MilosHaran (talk) 11:37, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Please, write and read more carefully! Christian Bulgarians - 250,000; Muslim Bulgarians - 14,000. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 11:32, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Citation from the report on the Serbs: "They have not merely resumed possession of their ancient domain, the Sandjak of Novi-Bazar and Old Servia proper (Kosovo Pole and Metohia), despite the fact that this historic domain was strongly Albanian; they have not merely added thereto the tract described by patriotic Servian ethnographers as "Enlarged Old Servia" (an ancient geographical term which we have seen twice enlarged)." The second map is a Serbian map from the mid. of the 19th. century. This map had been put together according to Serbian authors. Per this map, there is revealed the area where Serbian language is spoken and Serbs lived then. It stretches approximately northwest from the line: Prizren-Pristina-Prokuplje-Nis. East from that line, there were no Serbs. Jingiby (talk) 12:33, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- So, you are telling me that Serbs never lived in Kosovo in 15th century? MilosHaran (talk) 12:58, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- No way. Firstly ethnic Serbs settled the area at the end of the 12th century, but look above. You are claiming that Bulgarians never lived in Kosovo, provided that the area was ceded to Bulgaria in the mid. of the 9th. century and there are still thousands of people with Bulgarian identity. Jingiby (talk) 13:07, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- No brother, I haven't said or thought that, Bulgarians may Bulgarized Slavic tribes in Kosovo, but in eastern Kosovo, not western, because western was under Serbian control from circa 780 when Viseslav united all Serbian tribes, but Simeon conqured Serbia in circa 927, and then western Kosovo was in Serbian control again circa 931, when Caslav came and reunited all Serbian tribes, then in 969 western Kosovo became part of Byzantium theme of Serbia. In 1081 Constantine Bodin (known in your history as Tsar Peter III), probably conqured western Kosovo and give it to Vukan. Stefan Nemanja conquered all Kosovo in 1183 and Kosovo was under Serbian control until 15th century. MilosHaran (talk) 13:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Bulgarians controlled Kosovo for some centuries. In the 15th century the population of Kosovo was mixed, it consisted of Serbs, Albanians, Bulgarians, Vlachs, Italians. The local dialect of Orahovac is a mixture of Albanian, Serbian, Turkish and Bulgarian languages, and Orahovac is in western Kosovo. Even today there are people of Bulgarian origin in Albania, next to its border with Kosovo. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah, but Serbs were a big majority at that time. Look at this article Demographic history of Kosovo. Also, his great grandfather's name was Branilo/Branko, which is used mainly by Serbs and Croats, not Bulgarians. MilosHaran (talk) 13:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Academics debate whether the said Branilo was Skanderbeg's ancestor. Furthermore, the origin of a name is irrelevant. Many non-Serbs in the Balkans of that time had Serbian names. Even today many placenames in Greece and Albania have Slavic origin. Are Greeks and Albanians Slavic nations? No. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- None of said here is enough to eliminate a widely known idea Skanderbeg was Serb/Serb origin, and Antidiskriminator post is the one I support here. FkpCascais (talk) 14:12, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- I think that there is such theory: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL but it is far from widely known idea. Among the most reliable search engines as Google scholar, HighBeam and JSTOR the result is = 0. Jingiby (talk) 14:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- I hope you looked at the demographics article. Okay then, I will put it through article, as seeing people supporting it. MilosHaran (talk) 14:27, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- The theory that Skanderbeg's mother had Serbian origin is on the article. It is supported by a considerable number of academics. The theory that Skanderbeg's father had Serbian origin does not have considerable support by academics. It is part of discussions about Albanians-Serbs conflict, and ways how the two groups have helped each other. It has a political context. Hence we are not going to present every theory here. The matter is explained on relevant articles. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:36, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Dude, I haven't made that sentences, I found them on Wikipedia. Yeah we will not put a Skenderbeg theory on Skenderbeg's article, better find other one. Yeah, maybe Albanian academics. MilosHaran (talk) 14:43, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, well there has been some past editors who have pushed fringe theories popular only in Serbian historiography on Wikipedia, people are lazy about cleaning it up, and I suppose this is the result. A good number of them are banned now, though I know at least one is socking but pulling an SPI on him is just not worth it right now. The guy fought and gave his life for a land called "Albania". That makes him Albanian. Yes he had some Slavic ancestry. This is already covered on the page, but that's not enough for you -- and what's shocking is that I guess Albanian-Serb fights aren't enough, as you even go into denialism about Bulgaria's long and significant history in the Western Balkans and indeed the significant historical presence of ethnic Bulgarians in the area. Enough. Contribute constructively or don't. --Calthinus (talk) 15:40, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Check MilosHaran's edits. They have tried today to push a POV that there was no Bosnian identity in the Middle Ages. Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:44, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Jingiby: Antonina Zhelyazkova mentions a Venetian source where Scanderbeg's mother is considered Bulgarian and not Serbian. "It is a curious circumstance that Skanderbeg's mother was a Slav woman, according to some sources a Bulgarian named Voisava, a fact recorded in an anonymous Venetian chronicle: "Huic uxor fuit Voisava, Pologi Domini filia, est autem Pologum oppidum in Macedoniae et Bulgarie confinibus" [1] Vargmali (talk) 16:00, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Check MilosHaran's edits. They have tried today to push a POV that there was no Bosnian identity in the Middle Ages. Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:44, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, well there has been some past editors who have pushed fringe theories popular only in Serbian historiography on Wikipedia, people are lazy about cleaning it up, and I suppose this is the result. A good number of them are banned now, though I know at least one is socking but pulling an SPI on him is just not worth it right now. The guy fought and gave his life for a land called "Albania". That makes him Albanian. Yes he had some Slavic ancestry. This is already covered on the page, but that's not enough for you -- and what's shocking is that I guess Albanian-Serb fights aren't enough, as you even go into denialism about Bulgaria's long and significant history in the Western Balkans and indeed the significant historical presence of ethnic Bulgarians in the area. Enough. Contribute constructively or don't. --Calthinus (talk) 15:40, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Dude, I haven't made that sentences, I found them on Wikipedia. Yeah we will not put a Skenderbeg theory on Skenderbeg's article, better find other one. Yeah, maybe Albanian academics. MilosHaran (talk) 14:43, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- The theory that Skanderbeg's mother had Serbian origin is on the article. It is supported by a considerable number of academics. The theory that Skanderbeg's father had Serbian origin does not have considerable support by academics. It is part of discussions about Albanians-Serbs conflict, and ways how the two groups have helped each other. It has a political context. Hence we are not going to present every theory here. The matter is explained on relevant articles. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:36, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- I hope you looked at the demographics article. Okay then, I will put it through article, as seeing people supporting it. MilosHaran (talk) 14:27, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- I think that there is such theory: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL but it is far from widely known idea. Among the most reliable search engines as Google scholar, HighBeam and JSTOR the result is = 0. Jingiby (talk) 14:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- None of said here is enough to eliminate a widely known idea Skanderbeg was Serb/Serb origin, and Antidiskriminator post is the one I support here. FkpCascais (talk) 14:12, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Academics debate whether the said Branilo was Skanderbeg's ancestor. Furthermore, the origin of a name is irrelevant. Many non-Serbs in the Balkans of that time had Serbian names. Even today many placenames in Greece and Albania have Slavic origin. Are Greeks and Albanians Slavic nations? No. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah, but Serbs were a big majority at that time. Look at this article Demographic history of Kosovo. Also, his great grandfather's name was Branilo/Branko, which is used mainly by Serbs and Croats, not Bulgarians. MilosHaran (talk) 13:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Bulgarians controlled Kosovo for some centuries. In the 15th century the population of Kosovo was mixed, it consisted of Serbs, Albanians, Bulgarians, Vlachs, Italians. The local dialect of Orahovac is a mixture of Albanian, Serbian, Turkish and Bulgarian languages, and Orahovac is in western Kosovo. Even today there are people of Bulgarian origin in Albania, next to its border with Kosovo. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- No brother, I haven't said or thought that, Bulgarians may Bulgarized Slavic tribes in Kosovo, but in eastern Kosovo, not western, because western was under Serbian control from circa 780 when Viseslav united all Serbian tribes, but Simeon conqured Serbia in circa 927, and then western Kosovo was in Serbian control again circa 931, when Caslav came and reunited all Serbian tribes, then in 969 western Kosovo became part of Byzantium theme of Serbia. In 1081 Constantine Bodin (known in your history as Tsar Peter III), probably conqured western Kosovo and give it to Vukan. Stefan Nemanja conquered all Kosovo in 1183 and Kosovo was under Serbian control until 15th century. MilosHaran (talk) 13:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- No way. Firstly ethnic Serbs settled the area at the end of the 12th century, but look above. You are claiming that Bulgarians never lived in Kosovo, provided that the area was ceded to Bulgaria in the mid. of the 9th. century and there are still thousands of people with Bulgarian identity. Jingiby (talk) 13:07, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
" The guy fought and gave his life for a land called "Albania". That makes him Albanian'." What reliable source back this claim? FkpCascais (talk) 16:17, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Re FkpCascais, actually it's not necessary for me to provide sources for things I say only on talk pages-- otherwise I might be asking you for a source for your claim that "it's widely known that Skanderbeg was Serb/Serb origin" (check your grammar there bro). "Widely known" maybe by the readers of Serbian nationalist historiography which among other things calls Croats "Catholicized Serbs", pretends Bosniaks never existed, pretends Albanians never existed, and ignores Bulgarian history in the Western Balkans. Also re the "personal" comment, no actually I'm not even from the Balkans but let's WP:SPADE here, but even to me it is plain as day that the sole reason for this is provoking Albanians (is he a matter of great importance to Serbia? No, not really...). It's not acceptable, and if you lower yourself to this standard, don't be surprised by the result.--Calthinus (talk) 16:35, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
I am persuaded by Vargmali's source. Marin Barleti is his writing mentioned a Bulgarian tribe is Dibra area.[2] I think we should make changes to reflect WP:NPOV. Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:26, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Also, the link of his family with Serbian empire is totally omissed in the article, whys? Starting to being sources:
- Croatia: Ludwig von Gaj and the Croats are Herrenvolk Goths Syndrome page 246 and 247. FkpCascais (talk) 16:32, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Identity and Territorial Autonomy in Plural Societies by Ramón Máiz, Safran William - 2014, page , says "This force was ledby John Kastrioti, who was of mixed Albanian-Serbian origin and whose son, Skenderbeg, was ..."
- There are a lot of Bulgarian sources, some of them reliable, claiming his mother was a Bulgarian woman. Jingiby (talk) 16:34, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Of couse, we shouyld mention in the article that Bulgarian sources claim Voisava as Bulgarian. FkpCascais (talk) 16:39, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- By the way, those views are in fact maybe a fringe theory? Jingiby (talk) 16:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- HERE'S THE FULL LIST OF EARLY 20th CENTURY HISTORIANS THAT CLAIMS HE HAD SERBIAN ORIGIN. Let see what will you say on this. :) MilosHaran (talk) 16:47, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Congrats, you found a source from 1943, 1905, and the 1870s, and then one that looks like it was written maybe centuries ago(?) and uploaded them on Imgur. WP:RS--Calthinus (talk) 16:59, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Of course my friend. Here is photo of the page of book ″Historia univeryale racolta di Francesco Sansovino″ written by Italian scholar Francesco Sansovino, who lived 1 century later.MilosHaran (talk) 17:00, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- WP:RS. --Calthinus (talk) 17:04, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Okay, here's on Google books. I don't see why he is not reliable, he even studied law at the universities of Padua and Bologna. MilosHaran (talk) 17:30, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- The addition of the view that the "Triballi" were Bulgarians is in accordance with WP:NPOV. The view that Voisava was a member of Muzaka family should also be added. @MilosHaran Read WP:Primary and do not use old sources published centuries ago. Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:35, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Why? A man who lived 1 century after isn't reliable, did he even had a reason to lie? Why is then Marin Barleti reliable? OK then, here are the newer sources: 1 2 and here's list of other sources. MilosHaran (talk) 17:50, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- In "Problems of the Formation of the Albanian People, Their Language, and Culture: (selection) issued by Akademia e Shkencave e RPS të Shqipërisë, "8 Nëntori" Publishing House, 1984 on p. 329 is explained that Martin Barletty calls the Slavs «Illyrians» and the Bulgarians «Tribalis» (Bulgari siue Tribali). Jingiby (talk) 17:57, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @MilosHaran You should read the said policies before getting involved in topics that seem to be difficult for you. That there is a theory that Skanderbeg had Serbian origin (from his mother) is showed on the article. Read WP:Primary, WP:Undue, WP:NPOV. Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:00, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- But I want to prove that theory for his father exists too. For WP:Undue and WP:NPOV I have sent non-Serbian sources so I don't see any reason to they broke neutral viewpoint. I don't see which rule I broke on WP:Primary. MilosHaran (talk) 18:14, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Did you read those policies entirely? Do you understand them now? There are theories that Skanderbeg had Greek, Turkish and Macedonian origin. They, similarily to the theory that his father had Serbian origin, do not have considerable acceptance. The article should reflect only what is generally accepted as viable theory. Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:18, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- This dispute has gone on for years long before any of us ever edited. The result is always the same. Some sources say Skanderbeg had some Serbian origins. Others say he was completely Albanian (yes). Some sources say he was Greek, Bulgarian, whatever. Welcome to the Balkans where people have nothing better to do than claim each other's national heroes. This page is not changing to say we know for a fact he was a Serb, just as we are not changing Markos Botsaris to say he was Albanian, or Nikola Tesla and et cetera. You said you can be a constructive editor on the other talk page under your topic "Bosnian identity did not exist" (ahem). If that's true, then quit wasting our time and your own time too here. --Calthinus (talk) 18:21, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Jingiby So what? Serbs were also called Triballi in history. The first Serbian king Mihailo Vojislavljevic had title "King of Serbs and Triballs", Niketas Choniates called also Serbs Triballi. Mehmed the Conqueror in his looting of Serbia mentions Triballs as Serbs. Demetrios Chalkokondyles also calls Serbs Triballs, even flag of the First Serbian uprising has symbol of Triballs. MilosHaran (talk) 18:28, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- What about: Bulgarians never lived in Kosovo? Stop nonsensic claims, please. Full stop for now. Jingiby (talk) 18:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- I HAVEN'T SAID THAT BULGARIANS HAVEN'T LIVED IN KOSOVO. Here are the sources for Serbs called Triballs: 1, for second one I couldn't find it on the internet, but it's C. Paparrigopoulos History of the Greek nation, Athens, 1874, vol. 5, p. 489. And for the third page 120. You can check for the First Serbian uprising flag on Wikipedia. MilosHaran (talk) 18:45, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Actually, you did say ["Firstly, Bulgarians never lived in Kosovo"]. It's one thing to lie, it's another thing to lie when the evidence of the falsehood is right in front of our faces.--Calthinus (talk) 16:03, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- I HAVEN'T SAID THAT BULGARIANS HAVEN'T LIVED IN KOSOVO. Here are the sources for Serbs called Triballs: 1, for second one I couldn't find it on the internet, but it's C. Paparrigopoulos History of the Greek nation, Athens, 1874, vol. 5, p. 489. And for the third page 120. You can check for the First Serbian uprising flag on Wikipedia. MilosHaran (talk) 18:45, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- What about: Bulgarians never lived in Kosovo? Stop nonsensic claims, please. Full stop for now. Jingiby (talk) 18:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Jingiby So what? Serbs were also called Triballi in history. The first Serbian king Mihailo Vojislavljevic had title "King of Serbs and Triballs", Niketas Choniates called also Serbs Triballi. Mehmed the Conqueror in his looting of Serbia mentions Triballs as Serbs. Demetrios Chalkokondyles also calls Serbs Triballs, even flag of the First Serbian uprising has symbol of Triballs. MilosHaran (talk) 18:28, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- This dispute has gone on for years long before any of us ever edited. The result is always the same. Some sources say Skanderbeg had some Serbian origins. Others say he was completely Albanian (yes). Some sources say he was Greek, Bulgarian, whatever. Welcome to the Balkans where people have nothing better to do than claim each other's national heroes. This page is not changing to say we know for a fact he was a Serb, just as we are not changing Markos Botsaris to say he was Albanian, or Nikola Tesla and et cetera. You said you can be a constructive editor on the other talk page under your topic "Bosnian identity did not exist" (ahem). If that's true, then quit wasting our time and your own time too here. --Calthinus (talk) 18:21, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Did you read those policies entirely? Do you understand them now? There are theories that Skanderbeg had Greek, Turkish and Macedonian origin. They, similarily to the theory that his father had Serbian origin, do not have considerable acceptance. The article should reflect only what is generally accepted as viable theory. Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:18, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- In "Problems of the Formation of the Albanian People, Their Language, and Culture: (selection) issued by Akademia e Shkencave e RPS të Shqipërisë, "8 Nëntori" Publishing House, 1984 on p. 329 is explained that Martin Barletty calls the Slavs «Illyrians» and the Bulgarians «Tribalis» (Bulgari siue Tribali). Jingiby (talk) 17:57, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Why? A man who lived 1 century after isn't reliable, did he even had a reason to lie? Why is then Marin Barleti reliable? OK then, here are the newer sources: 1 2 and here's list of other sources. MilosHaran (talk) 17:50, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- The addition of the view that the "Triballi" were Bulgarians is in accordance with WP:NPOV. The view that Voisava was a member of Muzaka family should also be added. @MilosHaran Read WP:Primary and do not use old sources published centuries ago. Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:35, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Okay, here's on Google books. I don't see why he is not reliable, he even studied law at the universities of Padua and Bologna. MilosHaran (talk) 17:30, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- WP:RS. --Calthinus (talk) 17:04, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- HERE'S THE FULL LIST OF EARLY 20th CENTURY HISTORIANS THAT CLAIMS HE HAD SERBIAN ORIGIN. Let see what will you say on this. :) MilosHaran (talk) 16:47, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- By the way, those views are in fact maybe a fringe theory? Jingiby (talk) 16:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Of couse, we shouyld mention in the article that Bulgarian sources claim Voisava as Bulgarian. FkpCascais (talk) 16:39, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Also, the link of his family with Serbian empire is totally omissed in the article, whys? Starting to being sources:
Jingby, Triballi ´s are more associated to Serbs than to Bulgarians. Milos, the best sources are the secundary sources from scholars. A secundary source from a historian analising some primary source has much more value than primary source being interpretd by ourselves. Just for you to know. FkpCascais (talk) 19:36, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
There is enough information here or to any knowledgable person to permanently dispute this article factual accuracy. Please do not remove desputed untill you prove the claims in article with reliable sources (cannot be done obviously, simply because this can be clasified as 'fake history (fake news..)). 178.149.9.21 (talk) 16:15, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Albanian Identities" (PDF).
{{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|dead-url=(help) - ^ Enis Sulstarova (March 2006). Arratisje Nga Lindja: Orientalizmi Shqiptar Nga Naimi Te Kadareja. Globic Press. p. 45. ISBN 9780977666249.
Albanian editors dismissed IP concerns
... however, just looking for the collection of sources gathered here, looks like the concerns were legit. FkpCascais (talk) 21:20, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Random blogs are now legit sources? Wikipedia policy has not changed. Editing on wp:idontlikeit issues does not suffice. Please consult wp:reliable before supporting the ramblings of an IP.Resnjari (talk) 21:23, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- I know more then well what reliable sources are. But the content at that blog can be checked, and it is right, and they are reliable sources. I can go and post them here one by one obviously. FkpCascais (talk) 22:07, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not the one supporting the ramblings of an IP, then citing a blog to back a position. Blogs are not reliable sources. I should also state to you calling editors "Albanian" is not needed. People can be whatever origin or descent they wish, that should not be part of any any discussion. Resnjari (talk) 22:10, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Who is talking about blogs? I am talking about the sources cited at that blog. I thought you were wise enough to uderstand that. (Did I ever added a blog to an article as a source? Never obviously). Forget the blog, focus on the sources cited there. The blog is just usefull couse it has links to them, all in one page. FkpCascais (talk) 22:15, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- About the edit your colleague was blindly reverting me immediatelly in less then a minute, well, I understand for you is helpfull to leave an idea that ther are people who claim his origin was something else than Albanian, and put them all in same bag, but the fact is that having plenty of reliable sources claiming his Serbian origin cannot be equalised to one local Bulgarian source claiming he was Bulgarian origin. This situations have separated sources sourcing each claim. FkpCascais (talk) 22:22, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Your back tracking. You never said anything about sources in a blog. You just placed a link to a blog. Also if your going to make edits, why not use the sources yourself instead of calling editors you have disagreements as "Albanian" (what a person's origin may or may not be ought to be excluded), then agreeing with an IP who comments where removed as they are sock [1] and then palcing a blog and your reason. Disappointing, just disappointing. FkpCascais please strikeout your comment about someone being my colleague. Your are not attempting to build good faith and continuing to show wp:battleground behavoir.Resnjari (talk) 22:25, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Looking at FkpCascais' additions there are problems. The first is his addition of Theodōros Spandouginos [2]. The source is a English translation of a Greek medaevil text from the 1530s. That is wp:primary and WP:AGEMATTERS. Please especially on things like this about origin, RS sources that are wp:secondary for neutrality purposes. The second source that was added [3] by Waltz does not refer to Skanderbeg as Serbian, but only mentions the Serb factor in Alb history at that point in time. So its an OR addition to the article.Resnjari (talk) 22:43, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Resnjari I concur. I also find [his deletion of sourced info regarding Voisava's probably Bulgarian origin] and violations of WP:CLAIM to be problematic. --Calthinus (talk) 23:40, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Calthinus, the editor @FkpCascais said in their edit [4] "And dont remove sources". Thoughts?Resnjari (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Maybe we can replace it with "A Serbian by birth,... (refering to Skanderbeg) "Guerrilla Warfare: A Historical and Critical Study" page 15. FkpCascais (talk) 00:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Calthinus, the editor @FkpCascais said in their edit [4] "And dont remove sources". Thoughts?Resnjari (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Please feel free to add the sources to each claim. But the two are completelly separate claims, Serbian or Bulgarian are two totally different things. FkpCascais (talk) 23:43, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Also, please notece how I have sources which claim he was of Serbian descent (without doubt), and I didn´t removed the word "possible" (leaving doubts). I am being carefull and not adopting clear POV´s. FkpCascais (talk) 23:59, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais why are we going to added sources for "each claim" especially when they are wp:primary or don't have to do the the subject of origins etc. Clearly your second edit does not refer to origins. Your first edit uses a source that is over 500 years old. Both ought not to be there.Resnjari (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Because they directly refer to the origin of Skanderbeg. FkpCascais (talk) 23:59, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- You may think that you are not "adopting clear POVs" but Resnjari is correct that there seems to be one set of rules applied to Serbian arguments versus Bulgarian "claims", and one side has you deleting sources, and the other one, adding more text for each... Serbian origin arguments should not get any more space than Bulgarian ones, for starters.--Calthinus (talk) 00:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Exactly. So lets expand each on its own with their own sources. Thanks. FkpCascais (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- But please, bring academic, non-local, meaning non-Albanian, Serbian or Bulgarian sources, for the claims. How many you have for Bulgarian origin in that case? But if you want, we can use local sources and turn this into a mess, cause, want me to bring Serbian historians? FkpCascais (talk) 00:27, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, both of edits ought to be removed for reasons outlined. However you do make a point about other such sources and i'm ok with that on this bit. For the Voisava sentence, other sources for removal should be the http://www.makedonika.org source by Petrovski from the sentence as it does not meet wp:secondary. I'm not fussed over the Bulgarian source either way. Others though, don't know.Resnjari (talk) 00:40, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- The edits cannot be returned to the state that the article was simply because there are no sources claiming Skanderbeg was bossibly of Serbian or Bulgarian descent. No source claims that. There are plenty of sources claiming he was of Serbian descent, and a few claiming Bulgarian descent. But those two things are very different, and no sources claim both simultaneously as (wrongly) added in the text earlier. Each claim is separate and should be sourced by the sources that claim it, as none of cited sourced the pevious text which implied he was either one or another, as claimed before. FkpCascais (talk) 00:50, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- I am an honest and direct person. And I see your game here. You want to add together one fringe theory (about him being Bulgarian) with one quite plausible one (being Serbian, which is backed by many sources) so you can disregard both that way as fringe. I disagree obviously, and if you are honest, you will all undestand why. FkpCascais (talk) 00:57, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, can you please withdraw your remarks and assumptions you have made about me. You should consult wp:civil. Your sources are based on wp:primary and wp:or. On the Bulgarian source, i am not fussed about it either way. Using your logic, Petrovski would also have to go.Resnjari (talk) 01:07, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- No problem, it can go, there will be still plenty of sources claiming his possible/certain Serbian origin, while Bulgarian origin would be just a fringe theory. Lets gather sources in both ways and see what the outcome would be. FkpCascais (talk) 01:20, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, you refer to gathering sources. What you do in your time is your business. What i do care is that the two additions of yours currently in the article are based on wp:primary and original research on a sentence which discusses Voisava.Resnjari (talk) 04:53, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- No problem, it can go, there will be still plenty of sources claiming his possible/certain Serbian origin, while Bulgarian origin would be just a fringe theory. Lets gather sources in both ways and see what the outcome would be. FkpCascais (talk) 01:20, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, can you please withdraw your remarks and assumptions you have made about me. You should consult wp:civil. Your sources are based on wp:primary and wp:or. On the Bulgarian source, i am not fussed about it either way. Using your logic, Petrovski would also have to go.Resnjari (talk) 01:07, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, both of edits ought to be removed for reasons outlined. However you do make a point about other such sources and i'm ok with that on this bit. For the Voisava sentence, other sources for removal should be the http://www.makedonika.org source by Petrovski from the sentence as it does not meet wp:secondary. I'm not fussed over the Bulgarian source either way. Others though, don't know.Resnjari (talk) 00:40, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- You may think that you are not "adopting clear POVs" but Resnjari is correct that there seems to be one set of rules applied to Serbian arguments versus Bulgarian "claims", and one side has you deleting sources, and the other one, adding more text for each... Serbian origin arguments should not get any more space than Bulgarian ones, for starters.--Calthinus (talk) 00:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Because they directly refer to the origin of Skanderbeg. FkpCascais (talk) 23:59, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais why are we going to added sources for "each claim" especially when they are wp:primary or don't have to do the the subject of origins etc. Clearly your second edit does not refer to origins. Your first edit uses a source that is over 500 years old. Both ought not to be there.Resnjari (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Resnjari I concur. I also find [his deletion of sourced info regarding Voisava's probably Bulgarian origin] and violations of WP:CLAIM to be problematic. --Calthinus (talk) 23:40, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Looking at FkpCascais' additions there are problems. The first is his addition of Theodōros Spandouginos [2]. The source is a English translation of a Greek medaevil text from the 1530s. That is wp:primary and WP:AGEMATTERS. Please especially on things like this about origin, RS sources that are wp:secondary for neutrality purposes. The second source that was added [3] by Waltz does not refer to Skanderbeg as Serbian, but only mentions the Serb factor in Alb history at that point in time. So its an OR addition to the article.Resnjari (talk) 22:43, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Your back tracking. You never said anything about sources in a blog. You just placed a link to a blog. Also if your going to make edits, why not use the sources yourself instead of calling editors you have disagreements as "Albanian" (what a person's origin may or may not be ought to be excluded), then agreeing with an IP who comments where removed as they are sock [1] and then palcing a blog and your reason. Disappointing, just disappointing. FkpCascais please strikeout your comment about someone being my colleague. Your are not attempting to build good faith and continuing to show wp:battleground behavoir.Resnjari (talk) 22:25, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not the one supporting the ramblings of an IP, then citing a blog to back a position. Blogs are not reliable sources. I should also state to you calling editors "Albanian" is not needed. People can be whatever origin or descent they wish, that should not be part of any any discussion. Resnjari (talk) 22:10, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- I know more then well what reliable sources are. But the content at that blog can be checked, and it is right, and they are reliable sources. I can go and post them here one by one obviously. FkpCascais (talk) 22:07, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Open question
In a totally unseen manner I want to adress you User:Resnjari, User:Calthinus and User:Ktrimi991 in all my respect. I will ask you one sincere question and I want you to erase it after reading it, if you feel so. The question is obviously about Skanderbeg. Here it goes:
How would you feel if you had an historical figure that existed in Serbia and was named Etrit, had brothers named Arlind, Amir and Arber, and sisters named Arbnora, Kujtime, Arbiona, Ana and Vera? That he was initially of Albanian Muslim faith, and that his grand-father faught for the Albanian medieval kingdom? That all his letters were written in Albanian or Latin, and that he fought Greeks which were Albanian enemies at the time (supposing so)? How woud you feel if this person was made-out as Serbian national hero, and nowadays all relation of him to Albania or Albanians was denied despite all obvious evidence? Oh, but he is not Etrit, he is Retrito, he is Napolitanian (some Napolitanian and fringe authors say so). Thus, his Albanian origin becomes confusing. Lets stick that he is Serbian.
Please delete this after reading. But just to make you know, I am against this modern-day tendency of showing like if Serbs and Albanians have some historical animosity. We dont. We were friends troughout the history and it was only at early 20th century that Vatican and Austria needed to prevent Serbia to access sea that they made us fight eachother. The truth is that we are brothers and we coexisted for long.
The white and the black double-headed eagle are two faces of one same coin. FkpCascais (talk) 01:59, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Firstly, to clarify, not all of us are Albanians. Anyways, Idk what Resnjari and Calthinus think but I am telling you sth. Some Albanians love to point out that many of Greek heroes (Botsaris etc) had Albanian origin. However, those heroes belong to Greece, as they contributed as leaders of Greece, not of Albania. Claiming the hero or heroes of another nation is a waste of time. Bonaparte served French interests, Stalin (from Georgia) served Russian interests etc. Anyhow, nobody is denying that Skanderbeg's mother was probably a Serb, the concern is that all theories should be given space on the article. In the end, Skanderbeg was an Albanian leader whose bravery benefited the entire Balkans and wider Europe, Serbs included. After all, Skanderbeg's army included Albanians, Italians, Serbs, Vlachs etc. Ktrimi991 (talk) 02:22, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, don't really care as many of these figures are found in the Balkans of any religion, linguistic or ethnic background etc. Origins differ from their personal self identification and vice versa. @Ktrimi has said it better then i could ever had. What i do care is that content added to this article is of encyclopedic standards. I am not in the camp that denies Skanderbeg had Slavic ancestry at least on his maternal side (Schmitt has done good work on this that goes beyond nationalistic Balkan academia). His origin on his maternal side does not defacto make him a Slav of either Serb or Bulgarian identity.Resnjari (talk) 04:50, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Dušan the Mighty had Bulgarian mother and Bulgarian wife, was an Emperor of Serbs, Bulgarians, Greeks and Albanians but is part of the Serbian history. Jingiby (talk) 06:12, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Jingiby very good to point out. I might add that, thankfully, I have not seen even the most nationalistic Bulgarian editors pushing a campaign to rebrand Dushan as a Bulgarian. Thank goodness. As for me, FkpCascais, it seems you didn't get the memo that I"m not Albanian. Also it doesn't matter to me -- what does matter to me is a year long now campaign by a sockpuppeteer, with unfortunate assistance and approval from some established editors who happen to focus on Serbian topics, to provoke Albanian editors with this tribalistic nonsense.--Calthinus (talk) 06:36, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- More, his son Stefan Uroš V is 3/4 Bulgarian and in this way, Serbia had de facto Bulgarian ruler. Jingiby (talk) 07:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- So everything Serbian is Bulgarian? No. We need sources like the Bulgarian one that associate directly Skanderbeg with Bulgarian origin, not trough SYNTH. FkpCascais (talk) 15:54, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Um yes, we already have those on the page... multiple. And you removed info sourced to them. What is WP:FRINGE is not up to you to decide. What is disturbing instead is that Bulgarian claims even where sources are provided are called fringe, where Serbian ones are being treated as true. --Calthinus (talk) 20:01, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- I agree Calthinus. @FkpCascais keeps making their comments based more on WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS then anything else. Its time to revert to the stable version before @FkpCascais made their edits as there is no consensus for them.Resnjari (talk) 20:28, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- What did I remove? FkpCascais (talk) 01:21, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- [| "or a local Bulgarian noble family"]. Which was cited by an RS. You then added a sentence about how Strazhimir Dimitrov (an obvious Bulgar name) WP:CLAIMs a Bulgarian origin, thus making Bulgarian claims sound fringe while Serbian ones sound true.--Calthinus (talk) 15:39, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- Can we just revert to the stable version? Its clear that edits made by @FkpCascais were based on wp:primary with one and wp:or with the other.Resnjari (talk) 22:30, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- No. Please add sources for each claim separatelly. Serbian or Bulgarian descent are NOT the same. No source claims both as it was written, so it was wrong. The previous sentence had no source at all. Add only sourced claims. FkpCascais (talk) 23:22, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- I don´t have time tonight, but just by taking a look at a serch I saw plenty of sources claiming Serbian origin, while Bulgarian seems to be backed just by 2, both local sources btw. Quite a difference. FkpCascais (talk) 23:25, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- The the discussion about other sentence is different to the additions you made. Your first addition uses a translated source from 500 years ago and the second addition is based on a source that refers to something other then origins (hence an OR addition). These should be removed. Multiple editors here have expressed concerns with these edits and there is no consensus.Resnjari (talk) 23:44, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- OK, I will bring sources and we´ll choose the best ones. FkpCascais (talk) 23:51, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- If you want to bring something else for the article and start a discussion here first which is fine, but your previous two edits to the article need to be removed. Ad nauseam now editors have outlined the issues around them.Resnjari (talk) 00:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- Leave the two claims separated. No source says "he was Serbian or Bulgarian origin". That is false. The two claims are made separatedly and have different sources each one. Your "putting them together" is POV-pushing. FkpCascais (talk) 00:51, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- You can discuss that on a new thread if you want to split the sentence. Ping the others. But your current two additions have issues for the reasons already outlined. They need to be removed.Resnjari (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- You can´t add unsourced content. Add what is sourced with its proper sources to each claim. Why is so hard this for you? You have an agenda for wanting to put it together, don´t you? You clearly want to diminish claims of Serbian origin by mixing them with another obscure claim, that way removing cerdibility. You aer being a POV-pusher. Add content in a right way, don´t add unsourced claims. FkpCascais (talk) 01:07, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- You do not get to decide which claim is obscure. Sources do. End of story.--Calthinus (talk) 05:10, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- I dont care about your personal disapointments, I presented plenty of sources and I will keep on presenting them. You dislike what they say, I know it, that is why you are disapointed. FkpCascais (talk) 00:24, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- You do not get to decide which claim is obscure. Sources do. End of story.--Calthinus (talk) 05:10, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- You can´t add unsourced content. Add what is sourced with its proper sources to each claim. Why is so hard this for you? You have an agenda for wanting to put it together, don´t you? You clearly want to diminish claims of Serbian origin by mixing them with another obscure claim, that way removing cerdibility. You aer being a POV-pusher. Add content in a right way, don´t add unsourced claims. FkpCascais (talk) 01:07, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- You can discuss that on a new thread if you want to split the sentence. Ping the others. But your current two additions have issues for the reasons already outlined. They need to be removed.Resnjari (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- Leave the two claims separated. No source says "he was Serbian or Bulgarian origin". That is false. The two claims are made separatedly and have different sources each one. Your "putting them together" is POV-pushing. FkpCascais (talk) 00:51, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- If you want to bring something else for the article and start a discussion here first which is fine, but your previous two edits to the article need to be removed. Ad nauseam now editors have outlined the issues around them.Resnjari (talk) 00:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- OK, I will bring sources and we´ll choose the best ones. FkpCascais (talk) 23:51, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- The the discussion about other sentence is different to the additions you made. Your first addition uses a translated source from 500 years ago and the second addition is based on a source that refers to something other then origins (hence an OR addition). These should be removed. Multiple editors here have expressed concerns with these edits and there is no consensus.Resnjari (talk) 23:44, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- Can we just revert to the stable version? Its clear that edits made by @FkpCascais were based on wp:primary with one and wp:or with the other.Resnjari (talk) 22:30, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- [| "or a local Bulgarian noble family"]. Which was cited by an RS. You then added a sentence about how Strazhimir Dimitrov (an obvious Bulgar name) WP:CLAIMs a Bulgarian origin, thus making Bulgarian claims sound fringe while Serbian ones sound true.--Calthinus (talk) 15:39, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- What did I remove? FkpCascais (talk) 01:21, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- I agree Calthinus. @FkpCascais keeps making their comments based more on WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS then anything else. Its time to revert to the stable version before @FkpCascais made their edits as there is no consensus for them.Resnjari (talk) 20:28, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Um yes, we already have those on the page... multiple. And you removed info sourced to them. What is WP:FRINGE is not up to you to decide. What is disturbing instead is that Bulgarian claims even where sources are provided are called fringe, where Serbian ones are being treated as true. --Calthinus (talk) 20:01, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- So everything Serbian is Bulgarian? No. We need sources like the Bulgarian one that associate directly Skanderbeg with Bulgarian origin, not trough SYNTH. FkpCascais (talk) 15:54, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- More, his son Stefan Uroš V is 3/4 Bulgarian and in this way, Serbia had de facto Bulgarian ruler. Jingiby (talk) 07:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Jingiby very good to point out. I might add that, thankfully, I have not seen even the most nationalistic Bulgarian editors pushing a campaign to rebrand Dushan as a Bulgarian. Thank goodness. As for me, FkpCascais, it seems you didn't get the memo that I"m not Albanian. Also it doesn't matter to me -- what does matter to me is a year long now campaign by a sockpuppeteer, with unfortunate assistance and approval from some established editors who happen to focus on Serbian topics, to provoke Albanian editors with this tribalistic nonsense.--Calthinus (talk) 06:36, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- Dušan the Mighty had Bulgarian mother and Bulgarian wife, was an Emperor of Serbs, Bulgarians, Greeks and Albanians but is part of the Serbian history. Jingiby (talk) 06:12, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, don't really care as many of these figures are found in the Balkans of any religion, linguistic or ethnic background etc. Origins differ from their personal self identification and vice versa. @Ktrimi has said it better then i could ever had. What i do care is that content added to this article is of encyclopedic standards. I am not in the camp that denies Skanderbeg had Slavic ancestry at least on his maternal side (Schmitt has done good work on this that goes beyond nationalistic Balkan academia). His origin on his maternal side does not defacto make him a Slav of either Serb or Bulgarian identity.Resnjari (talk) 04:50, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Mediation
There are so many souces backing his Serbian origin than your removal of sourced content about it is disruptive. I will open a mediation for this. FkpCascais (talk) 09:44, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
The article needs an overhaul. Its got all sorts of WP:PRIMARY everywhere.
The article need an overhaul. Its got all sorts of WP:PRIMARY everywhere (and content based on sources from the 19th century ! -WP:AGEMATTERS) and has a layout of original research. Its time to remove these and or replace it with secondary sources that mention certain aspects of the life of Skanderbeg.Resnjari (talk) 12:08, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- Sources way over their use by date. Content should not be based on these and new scholarship has made either some of these redundant. Scholarship also can not ascertain for their accuracy. The following should go. Demetrio 1539, Miklosich 1858, Moore 1850, Thallóczy 1916, Noli 1947, Ljubić 1868–91, Jorga 1908–1913, Lane–Poole 1888, Gibbon 1901. I also came across this: Jacques 1995! This source is not even RS and should not be used in the body of the article at all.Resnjari (talk) 12:24, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Sources that are old or unreliable can be included in a section (or article) on the "Historiography on Sk.".--Skylax30 (talk) 12:25, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- They should not be in the body of the article. All of these are used for information in the article. Content based on these should not be there. If your talking about a further reading section that is different.Resnjari (talk) 12:27, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- I think a few of these are okay, like some of the 1900s sources that are currently only being used for figures or mundane things like that.--Calthinus (talk) 22:20, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- I think its best that all of those get removed because it has the potential to open a Pandora's box for certain POV pushing editors (as the events of recent times have shown regarding this page). On sources from long ago the topic of Skanderbeg was written from either position of limited research or more patriotic and other similar elements. I don't mind having those old references replaced for a piece of info in the article with strong RS sources of the past few decades as a new ref source. Makes the article stronger in terms of RS that way. Best.Resnjari (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- It would be better if they could all get replaced, yeah. I've been removing some. Should I just leave extra cn tags on ones that if I remove, could cut useful stuff out of the article? --Calthinus (talk) 23:24, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Do that with the tags, so like this editors will know what to address. Replacing takes a while due to locating RS scholarship and reading sources, especially this topic. Best.Resnjari (talk) 23:49, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- It would be better if they could all get replaced, yeah. I've been removing some. Should I just leave extra cn tags on ones that if I remove, could cut useful stuff out of the article? --Calthinus (talk) 23:24, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- I think its best that all of those get removed because it has the potential to open a Pandora's box for certain POV pushing editors (as the events of recent times have shown regarding this page). On sources from long ago the topic of Skanderbeg was written from either position of limited research or more patriotic and other similar elements. I don't mind having those old references replaced for a piece of info in the article with strong RS sources of the past few decades as a new ref source. Makes the article stronger in terms of RS that way. Best.Resnjari (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- I think a few of these are okay, like some of the 1900s sources that are currently only being used for figures or mundane things like that.--Calthinus (talk) 22:20, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Any reason the Greek name is excluded?
First, I don't see why the name in other languages should be given first in Albanian. Did he ever write his name in Albanian? This form of name appeared about 2 centuries after his death.
On the other hand, the Greek form of his surname appeared in some important Greek chronicles, mainly that of Laonikos Chalkokondyles, his contemporary. Some other late byzantine chronicographs simply ignored him, because he was not as an important figure as some claimed later. We had to wait till late 20th c. the monumental work of Oliver Schimt to learn that Skanderbeg was only partly accepted in his country, never won a major battle, and never ruled a city. Anyway, for the learned readers of WP, the Greek name is important. Obviously the latin Georgius Castrioti is a transliteration from the Greek. I added for the moment the original text of Chalkokondyles, and soon I will add some more modern sources citing the greek text of Chalkokondyles. Unfortunatelly, it is not easy to find a modern non-greek publication that cites the name in greek letters. This is one of the cases where the "primary sources" have to be used. We don't use any info from Chalkokondyles, other than the wording of the name, and this is not a problem. Regretably, some friends here insist on a pro-albanian POV and anti-slavic and anti-greek polemic.--Skylax30 (talk) 10:58, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Greeks are funny people ;D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.104.129.22 (talk) 15:26, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the above. Otherwise some could think that anti-hellenism is only in my imagination.--Skylax30 (talk) 09:21, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
- A: "They're against me!" B: "Don't be silly!" A: "You see! He called me silly!" --Andreas Philopater (talk) 00:07, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Any opinion on the topic? The name in Greek should be there or not, and why?--Skylax30 (talk) 12:54, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- The Albanian name is in there because the figure of Skanderbeg is associated with Albania and Albanians. Unless you have not read the whole article, then this thread is the result.Resnjari (talk) 18:16, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- This or similar questions are frequently asked by multiple editors for many years and deserve a proper reply based on consensus grounded in wikipedia rules. I have never seen such reply. I think nobody has ever presented a single convincing argument or criteria to add Sk's name on Albanian language into lede but not on Serbian or Greek language. Nine years ago there was a discussion about inclusion of Sk's name on Serbian or Greek language in the lede (link to the secion). At that time a small group of editors made up seven unconvincing specific and mutually exclusive and contradicting POV rules why Sk's name on Albanian language should be added to the lede and why Serbian and Greek language names should not. It might be a good idea to prepare some kind of Matrix with different langague names and arguments to determine the correct answer what language name should be present in the lede.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:41, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- This goes to same for you too. The Albanian name is in there because the figure of Skanderbeg is associated with Albania and Albanians. Unless you have not read the whole article, then this thread is the result.Resnjari (talk) 18:16, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- Only after Myth of Skanderbeg was created about 100 years ago. On the other hand, George was associated with Slavs and their resistance to Ottomans centuries before 19th century Albanian nationalists decided to create Albanian nationalistic myth of poor Ђурађ. Still, thank you for unconvincing, specific, mutually exclusive and contradicting POV rules number eight (
associated with Albania and Albanians
) and nine (read the whole article
). I will create a matrix and present it here as soon as I have some more time.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:34, 4 February 2019 (UTC)- You forget that Skanderbeg associated with the Arberesh community. They where Albanians (which included most of the Albanian aristocracy and other elite and a sizable chuck of the population) who fled while he was alive and after he died to southern Italy to escape the Ottoman wars and later conquest. The association has been with Albanians for a very long time. If you want to get specific about which Albanian communities kept his memory alive or was relevant to them, that's a different matter. Of course in the Balkans it was a different reality where his memory was forgotten and later reimported via the Arberesh during the Albanian national Awakening as a national symbol to generate unity etc. Among the Slavs he was a anti-Ottoman symbol for a time, they didn't bother to stick with him interestingly though like all the other types like in the nationalistic Kosovo Myth etc.Resnjari (talk) 21:28, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, Slavs indeed associated themselves with Skanderbeg without making a nationalistic myth of him. This article is about historical Skanderbeg. Not about Myth of Skanderbeg. If this article would be about Myth of Skanderbeg, the addition of his name on Albanian or Arbereshe language would be justified because Slavs or Greeks never made a myth of him. Resnjari, can you please present written source for earliest mention of Skanderbeg on Arbereshe language?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:01, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- They never made a myth out of him? They used Skanderbeg as an anti-Ottoman symbol for their own purposes of "liberation from the Ottoman yoke" polemic. Anyway a few clarifications on Arberesh. The term Arbersh is a self appellation the old Albanian community uses in Southern Italy. Their Albanian dialect (not language) is called Arberisht. Both the words Arberesh and Arbersht are old words that Albanian speakers used for themselves and the language prior to the 18th century and has survived outside the Balkans until now in Southern Italy. Skanderbeg had survived as in oral memory among the Arberesh and at the 19th century it was from such sources and so on that Balkan Albanians borrowed him for their purposes (Blumi, p.43. [5]). Skendi also did a paper on this titled Skenderbeg and Albanian Consciousness, 1968, pp. 83-84. [6] deals with the Arberesh and their traditions about the man. The rest of the paper looks at how those traditions were taken up by Balkan Albanians of the National Awakening when transnational links between both communties transpired in the 1880s etc.Resnjari (talk) 22:27, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- Resnjari, are you able to present written source for earliest mention of Skanderbeg on Arbëresh language or you want to say that in case of Skanderbeg wikipedia should make exemption and use oral instead of written sources?
- The article about Arbëresh language uses Gjergji (link to the section). Do you want to say that correct Arbëresh language version of his name should be Gjergji instead of Gjergj version (used by people who only borrowed Skanderbeg and used him for their purposes)? --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:56, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- About Gjergj and Gjergji both forms work, as per Albanian phonetic rules depending on the context. If you spoke Albanian that should not be some gotcha moment. About the Arberesh, Skanderbeg's memory survived via oral means. This has been documented. I'll quote Skendi as i guess you might not have access to the source. pp.83-84:
The memory of the Albanian national hero was maintained vividly among the Albanians of Italy, those who emigrated to Calabria and Sicily, following his death. Among them, "during the wedding dinner", wrote A. Smilari toward the end of the last century, "guns are fired on every side, and songs are chanted, which recall the dinners of Skenderbeg". And the afternoon of Easter day, "The men and women dance separately, singing poems which bring to memory Skenderbeg and the fall of Albania under Turkish rule." Living compactly in Christian territory, though in separate communities, the Italo-Albanians have preserved the songs about Skenderbeg and his exploits which their ancestors had brought from the mother country. Today one may even speak of the existence of a Skenderbeg cycle among them, if one takes into account also the songs on other Albanian heroes who surrounded him. Different, however, was the situation in Albania proper.....
Resnjari (talk) 23:15, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- About Gjergj and Gjergji both forms work, as per Albanian phonetic rules depending on the context. If you spoke Albanian that should not be some gotcha moment. About the Arberesh, Skanderbeg's memory survived via oral means. This has been documented. I'll quote Skendi as i guess you might not have access to the source. pp.83-84:
- They never made a myth out of him? They used Skanderbeg as an anti-Ottoman symbol for their own purposes of "liberation from the Ottoman yoke" polemic. Anyway a few clarifications on Arberesh. The term Arbersh is a self appellation the old Albanian community uses in Southern Italy. Their Albanian dialect (not language) is called Arberisht. Both the words Arberesh and Arbersht are old words that Albanian speakers used for themselves and the language prior to the 18th century and has survived outside the Balkans until now in Southern Italy. Skanderbeg had survived as in oral memory among the Arberesh and at the 19th century it was from such sources and so on that Balkan Albanians borrowed him for their purposes (Blumi, p.43. [5]). Skendi also did a paper on this titled Skenderbeg and Albanian Consciousness, 1968, pp. 83-84. [6] deals with the Arberesh and their traditions about the man. The rest of the paper looks at how those traditions were taken up by Balkan Albanians of the National Awakening when transnational links between both communties transpired in the 1880s etc.Resnjari (talk) 22:27, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, Slavs indeed associated themselves with Skanderbeg without making a nationalistic myth of him. This article is about historical Skanderbeg. Not about Myth of Skanderbeg. If this article would be about Myth of Skanderbeg, the addition of his name on Albanian or Arbereshe language would be justified because Slavs or Greeks never made a myth of him. Resnjari, can you please present written source for earliest mention of Skanderbeg on Arbereshe language?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:01, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- You forget that Skanderbeg associated with the Arberesh community. They where Albanians (which included most of the Albanian aristocracy and other elite and a sizable chuck of the population) who fled while he was alive and after he died to southern Italy to escape the Ottoman wars and later conquest. The association has been with Albanians for a very long time. If you want to get specific about which Albanian communities kept his memory alive or was relevant to them, that's a different matter. Of course in the Balkans it was a different reality where his memory was forgotten and later reimported via the Arberesh during the Albanian national Awakening as a national symbol to generate unity etc. Among the Slavs he was a anti-Ottoman symbol for a time, they didn't bother to stick with him interestingly though like all the other types like in the nationalistic Kosovo Myth etc.Resnjari (talk) 21:28, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- Only after Myth of Skanderbeg was created about 100 years ago. On the other hand, George was associated with Slavs and their resistance to Ottomans centuries before 19th century Albanian nationalists decided to create Albanian nationalistic myth of poor Ђурађ. Still, thank you for unconvincing, specific, mutually exclusive and contradicting POV rules number eight (
- This goes to same for you too. The Albanian name is in there because the figure of Skanderbeg is associated with Albania and Albanians. Unless you have not read the whole article, then this thread is the result.Resnjari (talk) 18:16, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
The Greek chronicographers Laonikos Chalkokondyles, George Sphrantzes and Michael Critobulus are the first who mentioned Castriotis in their chronicles. Barletti in latin came almost a century later. Also, the Greeks produced an extended bibliography in Greek. Therefore, the name in Greek is of encyclopaedic interest. Don't worry. You don't "lose" him if the name is in Greek.--Skylax30 (talk) 10:59, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Skylax30: Can you cite a WP policy stating that if there is literature concerning a person in a certain language, we should add his name in the WP article in that language? I am asking because I 'd like to add Karl Marx's name in Chinese. Cinadon36 (talk) 11:14, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- I suppose there will be no objection in adding a list with a famous man's name like Marx in Chinese, Korean and any other language. I don't know any WP rule that excludes this. After all, Marx and anarchists did not believe in nations, I think. But as an anarchist, you should know better. Alternatively, I can add a sub-paragraph with Greek bibliography on Castrioti, based on Titos Yohalas' book and others. Cheers. --Skylax30 (talk) 11:22, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Skylax30, the article is not about WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS.Resnjari (talk) 12:06, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- I suppose there will be no objection in adding a list with a famous man's name like Marx in Chinese, Korean and any other language. I don't know any WP rule that excludes this. After all, Marx and anarchists did not believe in nations, I think. But as an anarchist, you should know better. Alternatively, I can add a sub-paragraph with Greek bibliography on Castrioti, based on Titos Yohalas' book and others. Cheers. --Skylax30 (talk) 11:22, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Sorry Resnjari, but I don't have time to "study" whatever you are suggesting. Stete here clearly what you don't like. I transferred to the "Myth of Sk." the paragraph of Rama. You may delete it from here. Where are the "primary sources"? --Skylax30 (talk) 12:23, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- I know that's the problem, you don't study, but POV push. Look either that article gets absorbed into here or its stays separate. We are not creating WP:FORKs all over the place.Resnjari (talk) 12:29, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- Don't bother responding to this nonsense Resnjari. Feeding it keeps the exhibit on display. --Calthinus (talk) 04:57, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
... and why Albanian name is in LEAD?
Any explanation why the Albanian name is coming after the english? Is the english name a transliteration of the Albanian? Point to the appropriate rule please.--Skylax30 (talk) 13:49, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- Because the figure of Skanderbeg is associated most with Albanians, hence the Albanian name is given in lede.Resnjari (talk) 14:01, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
MOS:BIO has an example: *Cleopatra VII Philopator (Greek: Κλεοπάτρα Φιλοπάτωρ; 69 – August 12, 30 BC), known to history simply as Cleopatra, was the last active ruler of the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt ...
Have a look at Good Article Alexander the Great, it begins with Alexander III of Macedon (Greek: Αλέξανδρος Γ΄ ὁ Μακεδών; 20/21 July 356 BC – 10/11 June 323 BC), commonly known as Alexander the Great
. Cheers mate. Cinadon36 (talk) 14:02, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
The example is irrelevant. Cleopatra was called Κλεοπάτρα and Alexander was called Αλέξανδρος by his compatriots, and these are their names in the primary sources. It is true, though, that their names are somewhat different in modern Albanian. Cheers.--Skylax30 (talk) 14:26, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- More WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS views there. One hopes your editing is not steered by it.Resnjari (talk) 14:54, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Skylax30: I thought ancient greek alphabet consisted only of capital letters. Cinadon36 (talk) 15:14, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- No. The ancient greek script was the Linear B.--Skylax30 (talk) 20:49, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- Seriously??? What is your definition of "Ancient Greek"? --T*U (talk) 21:20, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- We are getting off-topic but I loled.Cinadon36 (talk) 21:33, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- Would it get back on topic if we write Skanderbeg in Linear B? Sorry, couldn't resist! --T*U (talk) 21:55, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- Possibly, but first try to find his name written at his time in Albanian.--Skylax30 (talk) 17:03, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
- Get over it @Skylax. Skanderbeg is an Albanian figure.Resnjari (talk) 17:08, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
- Possibly, but first try to find his name written at his time in Albanian.--Skylax30 (talk) 17:03, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
- Did he know this? --Skylax30 (talk) 23:19, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Cinadon36 (talk) 21:58, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Marriage
Wait was scanderbeg married in St Mary's Church, Vau i Dejës? Or Adrenica monastery on the St Mary's Church, Vau i Dejës it says he was married there on his personal Wikipedia page it says he married in adrenica monastaery which one is it then? Gjondeda (talk) 01:42, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
“major 2nd century Roman road). On April 21, 1451 in this monastery was celebrated the marriage of George Kastrioti with Andronika Arianiti. The archbishop of Kanina, Felix said the mess in the wedding in the presence of all the Albanian princes, members of the League of Lezhë and the ambassadors of the Kingdom of Naples, Republic of Venice, and Republic of Ragusa. This is mentioned first by A. Lorenzoni in 1940” from the Ardenica wiki page Now from the church of vau I dejes “It was the place where the national hero Gjergj Kastriot Skenderbeg married.” here’s some clarification Gjondeda (talk) 01:46, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
gained the title of sipahi
Nonsence! Sipahi is not a title.))))--Удивленный1 (talk) 13:15, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
- You may be right. Having in mind that it is 1430 in question, when Sk had 25 years, it is probably that he simply reached status of being member of sipahi cavalry. If the source indeed says that sipahi is a title, it should be taken in consideration that the source is work of Kristo Frasheri who belonged to group of historians from Albania with nationalist perspectives. He probably wanted to give to young Sk as much significance as possible, so he referred to sipahi as some kind of prestigious title. If nobody presents some valid counter arguments I will replace word title with explanation that it was a rank in the Ottoman cavalry--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:14, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
he was sent to the Ottoman court as part of the Devshirme
No. He was taken to the Ottoman court as a hostage. There exists great difference between hostage and devshirme.--Удивленный1 (talk) 13:22, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
- Good point. I will replace devshirme with hostage.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:17, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Skanderbeg origin, sources
Ever since a group of pro-Albanian editors took control over the article against Wikipedia:OWN, other editors have been strugling to edit and expand the article. Instances of such behavior can be observed in their inflexibility to accept changes backed by Wikipedia:Reliable sources. The problem is even greater giving the fact that the vesion they wrote and they prevent editors from changing or expanding, is unsouced. For someone fom outside things may not be clear, but, we are facing clear Albanian-POV pushing in which they tend to marginalise and gather all together all different theories of Skanderbeg origin, that way discrediting them all.
This revert is absolutelly unecceptable. Not only restores an unsourced claim (not even one source claims Skanderbeg was "possibly of Serbian or Bulgaian origin") but also prevents expanding each claim by itself.
Another, quite contentious aspect, is their addition of "possibly",. which is wrong, because most sources, as least for the Serbian origin claim, don´t use the expression of "possibility" neither any other expressing doubts. Lets see some of the sources backing up Skanderbegs Serbian origin theory:
- A History of Montenegro by Francis Stevenson, citarion: "Skanderber himself, as has been seen - Skanderbergthe national hero of the Albanians, was of Serb origin."
- Theodore Spandounes: On the Origins of the Ottoman Emperors, Pages 133-261 by Theodōros Spandouginos, page 47. Citation: "For some years it has been ruled by by Skanderbeg, a most valiant man of Serbian oigin."]
- Identity and Territorial Autonomy in Plural Societies by Ramón Máiz and Safran William, citation: "This force was led by John Kastrioti, who was of mixed Albanian-Serbian origin, and whose son, Skenderbeg, was venerated by Albanians at the time were Christian and their solidarity with the Serbs was not difficult to comprehend."
- What can Germans and French learn from Serbs and Albanians? by balcanicaucaso.org, citation: " Skanderbeg, the greatest Albanian hero, is the perfect example of this – his father was from Albanian family Castriot, while his mother Vojislava was of Serbian origin; his older brother was Sinisha, which is a Serbian or, to be more accurate, Slavic name."
- HONOR and HEROISM by Marko Miljanov Popovich, page 59, citation: "George Kastriota (Skanderbeg), (1404–1468) an Orthodox Christian ruler of Albania. His father, John Kastriota (of the Serbian origin), led the..."
- Encyclopædia Britannica: a new survey of universal knowledge by Walter Yust, 1952, page 762, citation: "(Skanderbeg) out wearing a royal crown, was of Serbian origin. The founder of the family of Castriota was a certan Branilo, who was governor of Kanina in 1368, and whose gandson, Giovani lord of Mat and Vumenestia, married Voisava Tripalda, daughter of a Serbian magnate."
- The encyclopedia Americana - Volume 8; Volume 24 - Page 878, pblished 1998, citation: "...son of John Kastrioti (Castriota), a high official of Serbian origin, and his given name was George."
These are just some of the first results I am finding and all in English. Would you now be kind and revert yourself so we can properly expand Serbian origin part? FkpCascais (talk) 21:42, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- ok FkpCascais once again Spandouginos is wp:primary and so is Miljanov. Both sources are old with the first being some 500 years old and the second over a hundred years old. In those cases WP:AGEMATTERS. Britannica and Americana are wp:tertiary etc and most articles contain content based on wp:secondary. Please this is not some thing about WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS.Resnjari (talk) 22:09, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- How is that Spandouginos is primary source? I don´t see at his book any citation quotes which would means he is refering to some old text of someone elses words. About the rest, in one way or another, they do say the same, which is Skanderbeg has Serbian origin. We are not strict to use just nowadays sources. Anyway, I will keep on bringing sources. FkpCascais (talk) 22:18, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- Going by your comment I'm getting this vibe that you haven't had a good look at some of the sources your using. With Spandouginos, p.iii.[7]. Its clearly stated its a translation of a text from some 500 years ago etc. Please desist for the time being as your going into wp:BATTLEGROUND territory.Resnjari (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
More sources:
- Croatia: Ludwig von Gaj and the Croats are Herrenvolk Goths Syndrome by Ivo Vukcevich, page 246, citation: "According to some sources, great-grandfather, Branilo Castriot, was a Serb (dórigine Serbe) in the company of Serbs. .... It is a matter of record that thee Castrior estates in Albania can be traced to Skanderbeg´s gandfather , Pal, who receved his estates from Serbian Emperir Dushan in 1345."
Mu friend, I am adding sourced material which is missing. I will bring much more. FkpCascais (talk) 22:37, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais your just confriming more and more that your not having a proper look the sources your using. Your latest addition based on Ivo Vukcevich [8] is a self published source (WP:RSSELF) done through Xlibris. Wikipedia does not allow for use of publications that are self published.Resnjari (talk) 22:54, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- Le Kossovo de l'absolu by Komnen Bećirović, pages 8, 9, citation:"... sur le origine serbe de George Castriote, dit Skanderbeg,..." FkpCascais (talk) 22:58, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm very concerned on the way your going about things here. Editors have expressed multiple concerns with the sources used, and you have repeatedly put them back and then added more problematic sources into the article. Please desist. The editing is going into WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and wp:BATTLEGROUND territory. I have engaged you in good faith and its very disappointing seeing all this.Resnjari (talk) 23:08, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- I am also very concern that what you call "editors" is just the 3 of you Albanians who happened team-tag and OWN articles. It is time to end this. I will keep on bringing sources cause WP:RS and WP:Verifiability is all that matters. FkpCascais (talk) 23:18, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais again why are you resorting to personal attacks. Whatever a person's ethnic heritage or origin maybe that should not be part of any discussion here. Please stop with this. Show good faith.Resnjari (talk) 23:29, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- At begining I had all good-faith, also because I have great Albanian friends in personal life. But you make me loose it when I see that here at Wikipedia tha tactic that you use is to make endless objections at talk-page in order to leave some info you dislike out of the article. You tried to disrgard Skandebeg Serbian origin theories by minimasing them and equalising them to some considerably lower in impotance origin theories such as the Bulgarian one. You should have shown good-faith when I asked you to respect WP rules and separate the two claims cause no source claimed both simultaneously, while all claim either one or another, You did it to prevent expanding the Serbian origin claim, as you still do. And, as you can see, there are plenty of sources for it. FkpCascais (talk) 23:38, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais how many Albanian friends you have is not something that any editor asked you and not a concern here. What is a concern is that you have rammed your edits into the article showing clear WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior when multiple concerns were raised by other editors about the sources you have used and the way you have gone about things. Its disappointing.Resnjari (talk) 23:50, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- I also don´t care if you are disapointed or what, all I want is for us to make the best possible article based on reliable sources. FkpCascais (talk) 23:55, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, good. So show good faith and revert your additions that you have no consensus for and also use sources are problematic.Resnjari (talk) 00:02, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- No, this state of article is certainly better than the previous, because the previous edit was unsourced and indicated total undue-weight regading the Serbian origin of Skanderbeg. I asked Deb for a sugestion, lets, wait. FkpCascais (talk) 00:10, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, your just showing more wp:BATTLEGROUND behavior. Again disappointing.Resnjari (talk) 00:15, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- No, this state of article is certainly better than the previous, because the previous edit was unsourced and indicated total undue-weight regading the Serbian origin of Skanderbeg. I asked Deb for a sugestion, lets, wait. FkpCascais (talk) 00:10, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, good. So show good faith and revert your additions that you have no consensus for and also use sources are problematic.Resnjari (talk) 00:02, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- I also don´t care if you are disapointed or what, all I want is for us to make the best possible article based on reliable sources. FkpCascais (talk) 23:55, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais how many Albanian friends you have is not something that any editor asked you and not a concern here. What is a concern is that you have rammed your edits into the article showing clear WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior when multiple concerns were raised by other editors about the sources you have used and the way you have gone about things. Its disappointing.Resnjari (talk) 23:50, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- At begining I had all good-faith, also because I have great Albanian friends in personal life. But you make me loose it when I see that here at Wikipedia tha tactic that you use is to make endless objections at talk-page in order to leave some info you dislike out of the article. You tried to disrgard Skandebeg Serbian origin theories by minimasing them and equalising them to some considerably lower in impotance origin theories such as the Bulgarian one. You should have shown good-faith when I asked you to respect WP rules and separate the two claims cause no source claimed both simultaneously, while all claim either one or another, You did it to prevent expanding the Serbian origin claim, as you still do. And, as you can see, there are plenty of sources for it. FkpCascais (talk) 23:38, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais again why are you resorting to personal attacks. Whatever a person's ethnic heritage or origin maybe that should not be part of any discussion here. Please stop with this. Show good faith.Resnjari (talk) 23:29, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- I am also very concern that what you call "editors" is just the 3 of you Albanians who happened team-tag and OWN articles. It is time to end this. I will keep on bringing sources cause WP:RS and WP:Verifiability is all that matters. FkpCascais (talk) 23:18, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm very concerned on the way your going about things here. Editors have expressed multiple concerns with the sources used, and you have repeatedly put them back and then added more problematic sources into the article. Please desist. The editing is going into WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and wp:BATTLEGROUND territory. I have engaged you in good faith and its very disappointing seeing all this.Resnjari (talk) 23:08, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Per Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (history): to weight different views and structure an article so as to avoid original research and synthesis the common views of scholars should be consulted. In many historical topics, scholarship is divided, so several scholarly positions should be relied upon. Some people masquerading as scholars actually present fringe views outside of the accepted practice, and these should not be used. To determine scholarly opinions about a historical topic, consult the following sources in order:
- Recent scholarly books and chapters on the historiography of the topic
- "Review Articles", or historiographical essays that explicitly discuss recent scholarship in an area.
- Similarly conference papers that were peer reviewed in full before publication that are field reviews or have as their central argument the historiography
- Journal articles or peer reviewed conference papers that open with a review of the historiography etc.
Per above mentioned classification: Robert Elsie, who is an expert of Albanian issues claims in his Historical Dictionary of Albania, Volume 75 of Historical Dictionaries of Europe, Second edition, published by Academic publisher Scarecrow Press, recently (2010), ISBN 081087380X, p. 398 in the article on Skanderbeg himself:
- Albanian prince and national hero. The real name of Scanderbeg (Alb. Skenderbej, def. Skenderbeu) was George Castriotta (Alb. Gjergj Kastrioti). George Castriotta came from a family of landowners from the Dibra region in northeastern Albania, who were no doubt of mixed Albanian-Slavic ancestry.
That is NPOV and meets the criteria above. Jingiby (talk) 07:50, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- The problem is that the ammount of sources claiming Serbian (not generalistically "Slavic") ancestry is so significant that clearly deserves a mention. FkpCascais (talk) 09:17, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, I have checked the first 3 of them. The first one is called "A History of Montenegro" by Francis Stevenson. It was published for the first time more then 100 years ago and is out of date, i.e. not reliable source. The second book is written by Theodore Spandounes: "On the Origins of the Ottoman Emperors". Spandounes died in 1538, i.e. this book is totally out of date. The third one is the only reliable source: "Identity and Territorial Autonomy in Plural Societies" by Ramón Máiz and Safran William, and claims Kastrioti was of mixed Albanian-Serbian origin, that is as a whole in accordance with the article. Jingiby (talk) 10:16, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you. What about the others? FkpCascais (talk) 10:20, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, FkpCascais. The next 3 sources are: 1. What can Germans and French learn from Serbs and Albanians? by Aleksandar Pavlović, published on the research on-line magazine called OBC Transeuropa, i.e. it is reliable at some degree. It claims: Skanderbeg, the greatest Albanian hero... his father was from Albanian family Castriot, while his mother Vojislava was of Serbian origin; Simply the mixed origins story is confirmed. 2. HONOR and HEROISM by Marko Miljanov, who died on February 2, 1901. He is a Serbian author and the book was simply translated in English. I would say, it is somehow biased source, and out of date, i.e. not reliable. 3. Encyclopædia Britannica: a new survey of universal knowledge by Walter Yust, 1952 edition. This source confirms the thesis on the Serbian origin of Skanderbeg. Nevertheless it is ca. 70 years old, that means this publication does not meet the criteria on recent scholarship mentioned above. Jingiby (talk) 10:55, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you. What about the others? FkpCascais (talk) 10:20, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- FkpCascais, I have checked the first 3 of them. The first one is called "A History of Montenegro" by Francis Stevenson. It was published for the first time more then 100 years ago and is out of date, i.e. not reliable source. The second book is written by Theodore Spandounes: "On the Origins of the Ottoman Emperors". Spandounes died in 1538, i.e. this book is totally out of date. The third one is the only reliable source: "Identity and Territorial Autonomy in Plural Societies" by Ramón Máiz and Safran William, and claims Kastrioti was of mixed Albanian-Serbian origin, that is as a whole in accordance with the article. Jingiby (talk) 10:16, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- The problem is that the ammount of sources claiming Serbian (not generalistically "Slavic") ancestry is so significant that clearly deserves a mention. FkpCascais (talk) 09:17, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Can I suggest that a RfC is opened here. It pretty much looks there will be a snow closure, so this might be the simplest way to resolve this.Bilseric (talk) 11:56, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Its time to revert to the stable version of the article before all the events of the past 24 hours. After that a discussion can resume about these things hopefully this time in good faith by all editors. Best.Resnjari (talk) 19:28, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- It's obvious that an essential part from the Myth of Skanderbeg belongs to this article. I wonder why there is nothing in here yet. FkpCascais Jingiby Resnjari Antidiskriminator suggestions?Alexikoua (talk) 21:57, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Do not ping FkpCascais as he is topic-banned. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:59, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Alexikoua, unless this discussion is about a merger of the Myth of Skanderbeg article into this one (and deletion of that article), we ain't creating forks all over the place. Also pinging Calthinus and Ktrimi991 as they have been involved in the editing of this article. And do take @Ktrimi991's advice, don't ping topic banned editors, as they got themselves into enough trouble as it is with this page. They have had enough excitement for the day.Resnjari (talk) 22:07, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Do not ping FkpCascais as he is topic-banned. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:59, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- It's obvious that an essential part from the Myth of Skanderbeg belongs to this article. I wonder why there is nothing in here yet. FkpCascais Jingiby Resnjari Antidiskriminator suggestions?Alexikoua (talk) 21:57, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
I see no consensus on the view of a "pure Albanian" in the LEAD. After all, how can a person be just "Albanian" when his mother is not, at a time that "Albanian" was not an official nationality, and when he never claimed that he is of certain ethnicity? I think the LEAD should reflect modern views on the man.--Skylax30 (talk) 12:16, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Skylax30, Albanian was an official nationality in the same sense Serbian, Bulgarian or Hungarian was, there is enough documentation available that proves the existence of an Albanian "race", distinctive from that of its neighbors. The point you're trying to make is that the page should list him as half-serbian only because his mother might, and emphasis on might, have been of Serbian origin. Now, matter of fact is that in medieval time ancestry was determined solely by the paternal lineage, that is by the lineage of the father which we know is up for debate as well since Greeks and Serbs oh so love appropriation, but we will take as Albanian. The existence of an Albanian national consciousness, as well as Skanderbeg's self-identification as Albanian in the letter he sent to Giovanni Orsini, the Prince of Taranto, make it abundantly clear than his "serbian" side had little to no basis. These absolutely clear chauvinistic approaches to the question at hand, and the appropriation of history by the Serbs (which is as pathetic as listing Skanderbeg as a "pure Serb" in the Serbian wikipedia and holding it as a featured article) has no place on wikipedia and the renegades that sullen this site should all be blocked permanently. ArdenDem (talk) 17:51, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
History has progressed a lot in the rest of the world. Shinasi Rama (2019): "[Albanian] intellectuals argued that Skanderbeg had done everything to save his nation and his people and, in his case, ethnicity and loyalty to the Albanian nation (that, of course, did not exist in the fifteenth century) had overriden loyalty to religion or self-interest." (in "Nation Failure, Ethnic Elites, and Balance of Power". Berlin, Springer, ISBN 978-3-030-05191-4. p. 94). Let's see if this article can catch up.--Skylax30 (talk) 20:39, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
To be clear once and for all. All the family was albanian and had orthodox names just like many albanians. John Kastrioti bought the tower in Hilandar as its sacred for christians and the name of the tower was Albanski Pirg called that by serbian monks themselves. John Muzaka is the first one to write about vojsava last name which was Tipalda and she was from Pollog a region even today inhabited by albanians and one of the regions where other confirmed albanian families were from like Gropa Noble House. John Muzaka wrote the book in 1510 and were memoirs from his father who fought alongside skanderbeg from the Noble Muzaka Family. Other members of the family were named Jela Angjelina just like skanderbeg sisters so this means those names are purely orthodox and Albanian. Because those were the common balkanic names after Dusan's empire. There are real time documents and im naming u barletti's and muzaka's mentionin many albanians with the name stanisha paul gion/giovanni/iuvan that are confirmed to be albanians(by mentioning the fact that they are not slavic) those are common orthodox names that orthodox albanians still use today. Names given by the church. And kastrioti were lords of mat which is one of the first autonomous albanian cities since arbanon principality 240 years before skanderbeg, so they were not surrounded by slavs even in dusan's empire this area was controlled by confirmed Albanian prince Karl Topia from the famous Topia Family. im saying are christian first not slavic names not everything thats slavs use are slavic. Anyway the moral of all this conversation it was that Skanderbeg Lord of Albania was Albanian as documented by both Barletti and Musachio. Arberesh people left albania when Skanderbeg died and still today they speak Albanian. So his family albanian from Mati and Sina. His people albanians. His vassals albanians except Crnojevici who were slavic. His priest Paulus Angelus (Pal Ëngjelli) wrote the earliest albanian baptist verse. "Une te paghesont nperemen te atit birit e spirtit seinjt" at the time when skanderbeg was still alive. Serbian side of the theory is in the names Jovan(which is used only on slavic versions) like Gion & Giovanni in the latin ones and there were many Gions in Albanian Noble Families. Just like Many Maras Jelas and Angelinas. Denissaliaj (talk) 20:46, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
When we refer to him as Albanian we mean Arbanian just like the previous Principality of Arbanon and Muzaka,Topia,Gropa Family. If having orthodox names means that you are Slav might as well make every Medieval Albanian a Slav and erase all our heritage and language and call it a day. The Main Facts are from Marinus Barletti and Giovanni Musachi, so it can never be "called myth or propaganda" . On the Serbian Wiki Page it says that Skanderbeg is Serbian which Albanians claimed as their own which is fake and a Violation of what Wikipedia stands for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denissaliaj (talk • contribs) 10:30, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Should this article be more about the historical figure and less about Albanian national myth making?
This is a well researched article but it fails to be objective about the historical figure and is written within the Albanian myth making tradition. The majority of the sources come from the national awakening and communist era or later authors who relied heavily on those works, which were written to foster Albanian national unity and national myth making. The article does not include anything from the Italian, Serbian or Greek writers, there is a long list of 19th century Greek literature which is ignored. The article is also biased and selective in its facts, any evidence non-conforming to the Albanian myth-making perspective is ignored, whilst even the smallest conforming evidence is disproportionately highlighted. I am not interested in national myth making but the real historical figure - in this regard the article fails.
Skanderbeg’s identity is disputed, which is understandable when you try to project modern national identities to historical figures who lived in a different time. This article should say he was a Byzantine nobleman, also why is he’s name written in the modern Albanian Language? He would have used the Greek language in his life time, both his names have Greek etymology, why not use Greek which would be the lingua franca of his region during that time.
Is there willingness to move towards a historically accurate Georgi Kastrioti, the Byzantine nobleman who fought the Ottoman Empire Wikipedia page which includes references from non-Albanian sources or are we happy to stay with the current Albanian myth-making figure Skanderbeg page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.197.202.179 (talk) 00:42, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
There are no sources that name Skanderbeg or Kastrioti Family as "Byzantine" if you want the truth this is the truth as mythical as it may look to you. Denissaliaj (talk) 16:37, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Debunking serbian theory
The serbian theory is based only in the fact that Kastrioti family had Slavic names forgetting that those names are purely orthodox and its a period after Dusan's Empire. Also i saw other claim that Kastrioti got Fiefs from Dusan's Empire forgetting that this does not mean they are serbs. To be clear once and for all. All the family was albanian and had orthodox names just like many albanians. John Kastrioti bought the tower in Hilandar as its sacred for christians and the name of the tower was Albanski Pirg called that by serbian monks themselves. John Muzaka is the first one to write about vojsava last name which was Tipalda and she was from Pollog a region even today inhabited by albanians and one of the regions where other confirmed albanian families were from like Gropa Noble House. John Muzaka wrote the book in 1510 and were memoirs from his father who fought alongside skanderbeg from the Noble Muzaka Family. Other members of the family were named Jela Angjelina just like skanderbeg sisters so this means those names are purely orthodox and Albanian. Because those were the common balkanic names after Dusan's empire. There are real time documents and im naming u barletti's and muzaka's mentionin many albanians with the name stanisha paul gion/giovanni/iuvan that are confirmed to be albanians(by mentioning the fact that they are not slavic) those are common orthodox names that orthodox albanians still use today. Names given by the church. And kastrioti were lords of mat which is one of the first autonomous albanian cities since arbanon principality 240 years before skanderbeg, so they were not surrounded by slavs even in dusan's empire this area was controlled by confirmed Albanian prince Karl Topia from the famous Topia Family. im saying are christian first not slavic names not everything thats slavs use are slavic. Anyway the moral of all this conversation it was that Skanderbeg Lord of Albania was Albanian as documented by both Barletti and Musachio. Arberesh people left albania when Skanderbeg died and still today they speak Albanian. So his family albanian from Mati and Sina. His people albanians. His vassals albanians except Crnojevici who were slavic. His priest Paulus Angelus (Pal Ëngjelli) wrote the earliest albanian baptist verse. "Une te paghesont nperemen te atit birit e spirtit seinjt" at the time when skanderbeg was still alive. Serbian side of the theory is in the names Jovan(which is used only on slavic versions) like Gion & Giovanni in the latin ones and there were many Gions in Albanian Noble Families. Just like Many Maras Jelas and Angelinas. Denissaliaj (talk) 20:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Denissaliaj: Many articles about the Kastrioti family are very flawed, from bad use of bibliography to political talking points. What should replace them needs to be correct, not equally flawed but ideologically pleasing. What specific changes would you make based on your overview of bibliography?--Maleschreiber (talk) 00:17, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
I dont want to change anything. I answered to the ones who want to use his name for political reasons with the justification of "serbian name". This is not a youtube comment section Denissaliaj (talk) 16:39, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2021
 | This edit request to Skanderbeg has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Skanderbeg was born on may the 6th and this page does not have it so i would recommend you guys to put it! Bush Master 64 (talk) 20:02, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. A S U K I T E 20:14, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Scope of rebellion
I should have noticed this earlier, but the lede says that both Skanderbeg's Rebellion was not nation-wide and the country was united under a single leader. I can see much of the country being united under a single leader, but not all, can someone check the source? Esszet (talk) 22:40, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Removed "general uprising" comment
I have removed the following comment: "Skanderbeg's rebellion was not considered a general uprising of all Albanians because he did not gain support from Albanians in Venetian-controlled areas or in the recently subdued Ottoman-controlled south." The reasons I've removed it:
- 1. It's not relevant to Skanderbeg's opening biography specifically. If such a comment were to be included, it should be in Skanderbeg's rebellion (as it already is).
- 2. The comment is quite misleading and partially false. The goal of the rebellion was not to expel Venice but rather the Ottomans, therefore the support of Albanians in Albania Veneta was not required or even desired. The League only went to war with Venice once for a brief period. Therefore, the comment that the Venetian controlled north did not rise up seems pointless, even more so when you consider that the Venetians sent men to aid the Albanians, and, ironically enough, it is extremely likely that some of the men they sent were from Albania Veneta. Further, the rebellion was entirely orchestrated by Albanian nobleman, it was not just local uprisings, which makes the inclusion of the sentence even more dubious, as you would not have expected an uprising without the direction of Albanian nobelman, who did not try to take Venetian territories, bar the aforementioned war. The second claim, that he did not have support in Southern Albania, is blatantly false:
- The Arianiti (Gjergj Arianiti) and Muzaka (Theodor Corona Musachi) had lands in the south and were Central/Southern Albanian noblemen, with forces (naturally) made up of Middle Albanians and Tosks, who supported the League. These were formerly Ottoman controlled territories until 1443/1444.
- the lands around Berat (in South Albania) came under the League's control. Which is clear from the Siege of Berat in 1455, and because they are part of the Muzaka's domains.
- It's stated in the article that Skanderbeg took control over the former possessions of the Zenevisi (South Albania). Also formerly Ottoman held. Additionally, as per John Zenevisi#Descendants and Simon Zenevisi, the Zenevisi were allied to Skanderbeg and Venice in 1455, and held Kastrovillari near Butrint in Southern Albania.
- "both sides of the Tomor mountains" (in Southern Albania) supported Skanderbeg. Also formerly Ottoman held.
- As per Himara#Ottoman period, the Himariotes in Southern Albania took part in Skanderbeg's rebellion.
Because of this, I believe it's clear that the claim Albanians in the Ottoman-controlled South did not rise up is false, and as the comment regarding Venetian controlled territories is irrelevant, and the intent of the sentence appears to be viewing the war through the lense of modern ethnic uprisings, I have removed the sentence. Djks1 (talk) 15:35, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Kastriot skenderbeu
He wos not a Nobel or had eny part of serbia or Greece pls stop post miss informations do ur research right he wos albanian end pure blood albanian soo if u need real information u can talk with me. 185.56.250.90 (talk) 17:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Skenderbeg has nothing to do with serbia region or Greek region . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janiprifti (talk • contribs) 04:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
really?
The page is a joke, starts with propaganda in trying to undermine skanderbe that he holds little and doesn't even mention how many battles he won and how nor any details.
Here how the rest describe in details https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3Qelvsi_5E — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.38.227.72 (talk) 03:47, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Jure Kastriotić
Jure Kastriotić was a Croatian nobleman from present day town Rama in Bosnia and Herzegovina. He was born in catholic Croatian family. God bless this Croatian noble hero. ShkijaJanjevarOlujaVictim (talk) 23:34, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Introduction containing a grammar error
The Introduction contains the following sentence:
In 1444, with support from local nobles and the Catholic Church in Albania, a general council (generalis concilium) of Albanian aristocracy was held in the city of Lezhë (under Venetian control).
The Latin term generalis concilium is grammatically wrong as the noun concilium is a neuter. Therefore, the adjective generalis should turn into generale - correct would be generale concilium.--2001:9E8:4621:48E4:E94A:7AB1:A6C1:7E0D (talk) 21:09, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
His name
I’d suggest adding his name in Serbian (Đurađ Kastriot (Cyrillic: Ђурађ Кастриот)), to not upset anyone. If Italian and Latin is there, Serbian should be too. Hidontknow (talk) 11:42, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
See the name sector. There are already all the variants written by different authors of different nationalities. Not in the lead. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 12:48, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
Frank Bardhi (Franciscus Blancus) calls him "Georgio Ivanovich vulgo Scanderbegh". in "Georgius Castriotus Epirensis vulgo Scanderbeghi, Epirotarum Princeps ...", p. 40. In this book the form "Gierg" or similars does not appear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.74.59.89 (talk) 17:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Mother and Father
Father buried in ortodox monastry Hilandar, mother Vojislava born Brankovic, sisters Mara, Jelena broter Stanisa. How he can be hero of Albania when something like region, country or kingdom or and writen proof about albanian language dont exist from that time? 87.116.164.2 (talk) 21:27, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Cheap amatoresque arguements from the victims of serbian propaganda have no place in wikipedia. Read learn then come back. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 22:53, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Father buried in a orthodox church but he proudly fought for the Catholic Church all his life. Where do you get your facts? 92.34.171.166 (talk) 04:07, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2023
| This edit request to Skanderbeg has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add a painting of GKS made by Kole Idromeno aka the Albanian Michelangelo in 1890 and about its whereabouts. Source: http://www.panorama.com.al/te-pathenat-e-51-piktoreve-shqiptare-zbulohet-koleksioni/ Jansenbas1 (talk) 05:01, 3 October 2023 (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. Pinchme123 (talk) 02:06, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2023
| This edit request to Skanderbeg has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Birthdate --> 6 May 1405
Source --> http://www.panorama.com.al/turqia-verteton-origjinen-shqiptare-te-skenderbeut-dokumentari-turk-si-i-mundi-dy-sulltanet-e-shek-xv-studiuesi-u-quajt-iskender-bey-si-pasardhes-i-aleksandrit-te-madh/ 2001:4BB8:100:382D:0:0:4DD8:875C (talk) 15:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- There is no document stating he was born in that day, only that St. George is celebrated, and because he is called George, he must have been born on 6 May. So in my opinion, you should not edit it that way. ShockedSkater (talk) 20:14, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. PianoDan (talk) 22:10, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Religion
Religion aged 0-20 is unmarked can someone add orthodox there 109.240.2.246 (talk) 09:07, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Religion 0-20? Come on now this is not tiktok. Let’s also mention in Gjon Kastrioti (his father) wiki how he was Catholic in 1407, Orthodox in 1420, turned to Muslim in 1430 and found Catholicism again by the end of his life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:7BD:28FA:40DD:FD15:A95F:707B (talk) 08:55, 27 January 2024 (UTC)