Wikipedia

Talk:Albania/Archive 7

< Talk:Albania
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Resnjari in topic Inaccuracies, omissions and POV issues with Ethnic map
Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

Regarding the term occupation

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The source Morrock, Richard (11 October 2010). The Psychology of Genocide and Violent Oppression: A Study of Mass Cruelty from Nazi Germany to Rwanda. McFarland. p. 55. ISBN 978-0-7864-5628-4. The nationalist Balli Kombetar, which had fought against Italy, made a deal with the German invaders, and formed a "neutral" government in Tirana which...

>and then it continues by saying word per word > Italy invaded and occupied albania...... ( and keep reading from there ) Page 55 !

So i fail to see why did you revert my edit Alexikoua? It says multiple times that Albania was occupied and invaded ... For what is worth this was from the source that Antidiskriminator already brought here ...

Gjirokastra15 (talk) 15:46, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Section about the Communist Era needs revision

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It reads as incredibly biased right now. Portraying the entire Communist era in a negative way. That is not in keeping with the impartial neutral tone expected of an encyclopedia article. I am aware the people likely editing this page are biased but still, they need to control themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.158.163.211 (talk) 01:29, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the map in the demographic section

Latest comment: 9 years ago20 comments6 people in discussion

I am aware that the map tries to depict areas where ethnic or linguistic minorities exist alongside an albanian majority , however it is inaccurate and it confuses the reader by giving the impression that 20 % of the Albanian territory belongs to ethnic minorities . What is more important is that the map is not sourced , and it seems that an editor in the past took some time to put some paint on a map of Albania and present it as a reality ... As per WP:NOR this map clearly does not belong there , and it results in a nationalistic POV pushing .

Gjirokastra15 (talk) 15:24, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

The file page seems to list several sources. --Local hero talk 16:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Those sources do not include this particular map , rather they are the material that the editor has used for his/her wp:original work . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 16:39, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Using reliable sources to make a map is an acceptable practice and is not considered original research. Only when you find an obvious fault with the map you can remove it. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 17:23, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough Dr.K , however i think that the description of the image needs rewording in order to properly give the appropriate context and what the map is actually depicting . Said otherwise , i think that the description needs to clarify more the fact that those marked regions do not imply a minority plurality , otherwise a reader might get the wrong idea . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 17:52, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Gjirokastra. I have no objection to your proposal. Please go ahead and modify the caption. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 17:56, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you too Dr.K , i am glad that we managed to find a consensual platform which can both resolve the raised concerns and keep the map in the demographic section . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 17:00, 30 December 2014 (UTC)


I don't understand why my comment was removed?! Furyan-10 (talk) 20:23, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Click on this and look on the left, these are the two comments you removed when you replied. You can reply but without removing comments of others. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 20:47, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

None of the sources used to make the map say that the presence of minority languages is "historical". This is blatant source misrepresentation. Athenean (talk) 17:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC) ¨

I do not understand your objection , if they are not historically there , then when did they come in those lands ? Please do not try to create something out of nothing . In addition i hope you understand that one of those map states the year 1918 in it ? Gjirokastra15 (talk) 18:04, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
There seems to be a lot you don't understand, such as the fact that most of the sources used are current and not "historical". By saying "historical" you are trying to imply that those languages were formerly spoken in those areas, but are no longer. This would be consistent with the rest of your previous attempts at doing everything you can to minimize the mention of the Greek minority in Albania, which seems to be the only reason you are editing wikipedia these days. Athenean (talk) 18:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Please leave the personal attacks out of this discussion as per wp:npa , we are not in a forum here , and hopefully all of us are intelligent enough to maintain a civil discussion . In addition , i hope you are able to see that those sources present a map that contains 300% LESS lands than that depicted on the map here in wikipedia . As per wp:nor this map being an original work , has no place there because simply based on the sources the map is WRONG .... yet i did not remove it . But if you insist i might forward this subject to the No original research noticeboard Gjirokastra15 (talk) 18:20, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
I have to add that Gjiro. insists on wp:IDONTLIKEIT, apart from grabbing the opportunity to support ip created disruption. The map was the result of cooperation from various experienced wikipedians (Greek&Albanians&others) & is supported by multiple references (academic too, L.M. Dipolmatique etc.).Alexikoua (talk) 07:54, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
This is almost comical , what i see on the file history of the image , is you war editing with an Albanian editor over it . So no this map is not the result of cooperation , far from that actually . In addition there seems to be a lack of ability to understand the essence of the problem , said more simply the map has NOT been removed and a consensus was established long ago with Dr.K for whom i have great respect . However , if you 2 people insist ( Alexikoua and Athenean ) i can forward this matter to the No original research noticeboard , given the fact that the sources present only 40 % of the colored area of the map existing in wikipedia . And to refresh your memories : "No original research" (NOR) is one of three core content policies that, along with Neutral point of view and Verifiability, determines the type and quality of material acceptable in articles." Shall we leave this behind us ? Or shall we consume our wikipedia lives in a pointless discussion given the fact that you two create a conflict out of nothing ? Gjirokastra15 (talk) 12:23, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Is that a threat ("if you two people insist...")? You should never make threats, particularly empty ones. It only reduces your (already low) credibility even more. Athenean (talk) 12:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
The only credibility that i see getting dramatically reduced is yours for making accusations that do not stand . At this point i feel that it is in my best interest to let your comment do all the speaking for me ... Gjirokastra15 (talk) 12:49, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Ok, so since you are not against the map, I've added it to another article [1]. Happy New Year! Athenean (talk) 17:18, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
In principle i am not against it although it could be avoided for the reasons stated above . Happy new year to you too !Gjirokastra15 (talk) 04:11, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
I see so much arrogance in your words!. Gjirokastra15 said several times that he is against the map, nevertheless was able to find an common agreement and the map is still in the demographic section even though should not be there, because based on the sources the map is wrong. We don't see maps showing the historical presence of Albanians in Greece and, as we all know it's a fact readily demonstrated! We have plenty of sources. Furyan-10 (talk) 22:21, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the latest edits by the user Kj1598

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Although some of his edits are an added value to the article , others are a removal of established content as per wp:idontlikeit . Removal of maps , removal of all of the images , of texts and sources . In addition , this user seems to operate multiple ip accounts , massively editing the whole Albanian article as per his own 'image' : 167.187.100.193 , 2602:306:C480:15E0:9989:74DB:40FC:50B9 , 108.72.1.94 . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 20:22, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

@Gjirokastra15: I think you might mean Kj1595 (talk · contribs), not Kj1598. --220 of Borg 13:08, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Clarification required on status of Macedonian in Pustec region

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Macedonian is official in Pustec and this I see has led to the Macedonian language being used for names of settlements in the region. The article says this but there are no sources in that space. Can someone with better knowledge please clarify whether Macedonian is the official language of the region with twin status to Albanian in all other regions? This would make the linguistic status identical to Switzerland and Belgium even if the area in question is relatively minute. The reason I ask is that I have found no sources to name Macedonian and Albanian (or anything else) as joint official. It is certainly not the case that all of Albania has to learn the Macedonian language in the way Swedish is obligational in Finland, so is it also the case that the people of Pustec will exclusively learn Macedonian without the requirement to speak Albanian? According to road signs and street signs in the area, it is bilingual with Albanian sometimes coming on top. So can anyone throw light on this subject? Thanks. --Oranges Juicy (talk) 12:53, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Then that article is wrong , and thus not sourced . It is a municipality of just 3200 people that self identify as Macedonians , and they enjoy all the rights a minority enjoys as per E.U guidelines . The name of that municipality was changed in communist times , and some years ago the government changed it back again to how it had been prior to communism ( So it has nothing to do with that region being a special zone or something ) . As for this part of your comment : 'This would make the linguistic status identical to Switzerland and Belgium even if the area in question is relatively minute.' , it is totally a wp:synth and actually not correct . The region is a bilingual one , they enjoy the right of studying both their language and Albanian , and no other name has been changed except from the municipality name for the reason explained above. Gjirokastra15 (talk) 16:34, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply Gjirokastra. This has all now become clear to me. My main focus was whether Pustec should be at its location and since I did not know the full status of Macedonian in Albania, I decided to ask here. What I have discovered is that a number of Macedonian names have achieved official status in Albania though clearly in a primary spelling form that will be compatible with Albanian. That said, if it had been the case that Macedonian were level pegging with Albanian then a Swiss/Belgian model is exactly what you would have had and that is not SYNTH because I wasn't implying it, just asking if that were the case. The situation is exactly as I suspected, the Macedonian community enjoy linguistic privileges and are bilingual as is the major Albanian community of Macedonia. All has been sorted now. --Oranges Juicy (talk) 13:34, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

100% renewable energy?

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Why is Albania listed in the Category:100% renewable energy?

Is this an error to be corrected? If not, it will need some serious explanation.

RhinoMind (talk) 01:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like an outrageous claim to me. Needs to be backed by sources. Jcmcc (Talk) 16:02, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Trouble archiving links on the article

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello. I am finding myself repeatedly archiving links on this page. This usually happens when the archive doesn't recognize the archive to be good.

This could be because the link is either a redirect, or I am unknowingly archiving a dead link. Please check the following links to see if it's redirecting, or in anyway bad, and fix them, if possible.

In any event this will be the only notification in regards to these links, and I will discontinue my attempts to archive these pages.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:46, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on Albania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:46, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Albania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:41, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

"Main Leaders" Section.

Latest comment: 9 years ago16 comments6 people in discussion

@Gjirokastra15: brought up a good point. The "Main Leaders" section gives undo importance to any public figure added to it. It creates an arbitrary section for people to edit war over who is "main" and who isn't. I believe this should either be expanded into referenced blurbs about important people and why they are important. Or removed entirely. Or simply be a gallery of public figures without giving them unexplained importance. Jcmcc (Talk) 22:37, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

That is precisely the reason why that section should not have any public figures from the post-communist political 'arena' . That section should rather continue to be a list of historical main leaders . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 17:31, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
I agree that this section should be completely removed, it's nothing more than a wp:pov collection of figures incosistent with country articles. However, these personalities can be part of the Albanians infobox after concensus is reached.Alexikoua (talk) 10:08, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Alternatively some of the pictures can be added in the correspodent history section. As I see there is already a Hoxha poster, a Zog picture and a Skanderbeu helmet. There is some room for additional pics too. However, the creation of a separate gallery-section "leaders", isn't appropriate in general articles such as this one.Alexikoua (talk) 10:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
You have to read 1 more time this discussion . I will assume that you did not comprehend our discussion and i will assume your act of removing that list as a product of naive misunderstanding . That list shows all the main historical leaders of Albania from its independence until the era of communism . There is no wp:pov there , rather a collection of historical facts , the only wp:pov i saw is your attempt at removing a list without consensus per wp:idontlikeit. Gjirokastra15 (talk) 12:58, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
(ignore trolling) I was well aware of the discussion since I've already participated & agreed with the full removal of this virtually useless and incosistent list. It appears that wp:ILIKEIT applies to you, while your edit summary clearly reveals lack of wp:agf and can be easily labelled as tendentious. As Jcmcc450 clearly noted this appears as a POV gallery, nothing more than an incosistent list of images. For future reference Skanderbeg lived ca. 450 years before independence, while a number of important post-independence leaders are missing (interwar period, Ramiz Alia etc). As I remember this list was added without concensus, so removing it (with the agreement of the majority of editors in this discussion) is a quite normal procedure. What's not acceptable are edit summaries that contain a trolling pattern with false accusations of vandalism [[2]] .Alexikoua (talk) 15:46, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
As per this edit the consensus was that this list is an added value to the article . Ramiz alia is the only one missing and he served only for 2 years , but you are free to add him if you wish . Skanderbeg is the main national hero of Albania and thus merits to be in that list . Your memory fails you because there was no objection for adding that list .Said otherwise all the main historical leaders of Albania are in that list ( excluding Ramiz Alia ) thus a scenario of an edit war is unlikely . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 18:50, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
It appears you pretend that R. Alia is the only one missing in this pov list of historical leaders... "from independence". As part of this discrepancy, Abdyl Frashëri bears the unofficial title of the "leader of the national awakening" (also unsourced). Let me help you on that [[3]]. Not to mention that Wied was just a nominal leader who didn't exercised any kind of control in a chaotic Albania of 1914.Alexikoua (talk) 20:57, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
I also have to note that when an editor concludes that this list "at least is not asserting as much undue importance" [[4]] is far from claiming that this is an added value for the article.Alexikoua (talk) 21:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree that this gallery of leaders should be removed from the article altogether. Some of those images might be left in the article, but having such a gallery is completely useless. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I fully agree. I also find it more than a little bizarre. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 23:22, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
For the record: I agree with its removal. I simply renamed the header as I don't like deleting sections without consensus (I know, I know wp:bold and all that..) Jcmcc (Talk) 23:46, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Some of the pictures can be part of the history section, especially Hoxha, Skenderbeu, since there is some room for additional pictures (not to mention that there are already pics related to both). Fan Noli pic can be added in religion section. A Zog pic is already present in history. Thus without this gallery the reader won't lose any important piece of info.Alexikoua (talk) 05:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
I also agree with the removal. This "gallery" is completely arbitrary and serves no useful purpose. Who gets to decide which figures get included? Furthermore, per WP:NOT, wikipedia is not a image gallery or Instagram. Athenean (talk) 05:19, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
I removed the gallery per clear consensus and my 24-hour notice above. Thank you all. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 03:23, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Albania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:42, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Separate section

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

RE:"The average annual rate of Albania's national income was 29% higher than the world average and 56% higher than the European average.[66] "

I. There seems to be nothing in the reference [66] that remotely refers to national income.

II. One would seldom if ever refer to "average annual rate of national income". What does this even mean? Possibly it is the rate of increase?

III. Even if some meaning could be assigned to "average annual rate of national income", it might well mislead readers into assuming that the income of Albania is higher than that of Europe.

Wikiwatxher (talk) 01:31, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Disruption in history section

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A number of edits fall clearly into wp:POV and wp:OR such as: [[5]] ("The history of Albania emerged from the prehistoric stage from the 4th century BC, with early records of Illyria in Greco-Roman historiography. The modern territory of Albania has no counterpart in antiquity, comprising parts of the Roman provinces of Dalmatia (southern Illyricum) and Macedonia (particularly Epirus Nova)." (lacks citation), the most childish addition: "During Antiquity the territor of modern Albania was inhabited by Illyrians. The territory the tribes was known as Illyria, corresponding roughly to the area between Adriatic sea in west, Drava river in North, Morava river in east and the mouth of Vjosë river in south." & [[6]]). Even the same text explains that there were no Illyrians south of Vjose's mouth, thus a reader will understand that what's today Albania wasn't exclusively inhabited by Illyrian tribes but in geographic terms "mainly". It appears that this wasn't understood and the correction was reverted with the excuse that this was "I don't like it" [[7]].

Another issue is that since this article is about Albania, historical information about regions out of Albania, such as Illirian tribes that inhabited Drava, is irrelevant for this article. In general Illyria is a region that does not correspond to Albania in geographic terms.Alexikoua (talk) 20:53, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Mother Teresa

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The pic of Mother Teresa doesn't belong in this article. She's not from Albania. Not born there, never had Albanian citizenship, never even visited for the weekend. The pic of course belongs in Albanians, since she is ethnic Albanian, but it simply does not belong here. Otherwise we are conveying to our readers the impression that she is from Albania, i.e. we are actively misinforming our readers. Athenean (talk) 05:00, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

But she is Albanian though regardless where she was born, she has always identified herself as Albanian by birth. Her Name is of an Albanian origin, both her parents were Albanian and in Quoting her: “By blood, I am Albanian. By citizenship, an Indian. By faith, I am a Catholic nun. As to my calling, I belong to the world. As to my heart, I belong entirely to the Heart of Jesus."

Crime rate

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Should numbeo be used at all as a reference? It's highly unscientific. 46.126.184.3 (talk) 19:41, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Albania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:12, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Albania

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Albania have 4 millions, not 2. Did servs write this page? Why they trying to tell there are less of us? I change. Besart93 (talk) 22:14, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable source for that number? Qed237 (talk) 22:17, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Albania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:50, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Mother Teresa

Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

As stated in a previous discussion), Mother Teresa was not born in Albania, never lived there, and didn't even visit the country until in her 70s, so a picture of her in this article is misleading. She is of from the Albanian ethnic group, so can be covered in Albanians. Note that she isn't even mentioned in the text of this article. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 17:20, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, in fact I posted the exact same thing at the tp a while back. This is a recurring problem due to the propaganda value of Mother Teresa. Athenean (talk) 17:33, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
I note that Igaalbania (talk · contribs) is insisting on including a picture of Mother Teresa and, after twice being invited to, has not taken part in this discussion about it. Strangely, they also want to remove an image of Enver Hoxha, possibly the most significant figure in 20th century Albania, and indisputably from Albania. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 18:25, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
We have to file a report at 3RRN if this continues. I have reverted for now. Dr. K. 18:40, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Enough with the image playing

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

User Igaalbania is playing with thumbs repeatedly deleting my work and also causing other controversial problems. Euripides ψ (talk) 22:51, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

I agree. This image shuffling has to stop. Dr. K. 20:52, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2016

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

77.180.229.181 (talk) 11:10, 25 October 2016 (UTC)


You have to put the urbanisation in the country (List of the cities in Albania)

  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — Andy W. (talk) 01:25, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2016

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

You can change the positions of the photos better! 78.55.81.171 (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

  Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XX with YY" or "Please add ZZ between PP and QQ". - Arjayay (talk) 21:13, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 November 2016

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Can you deactivate the protection? 77.180.11.65 (talk) 17:56, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

  Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. clpo13(talk) 18:01, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 December 2016

Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Is it able to deactivate the protection, the page needs some edits! good luck 92.229.166.70 (talk) 22:22, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

  Not done: If you are requesting unprotection, the correct protocol is to ask the protecting administrator first for unprotection (EdJohnston (talk)). If for any reason he or she is unresponsive, unwilling, or unable to lower protection then you may list your request on this page. regards, DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 06:35, 16 December 2016 (UTC).
  Note: or you can specify the changes you want to be made in a "change X to Y" format. regards, DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 06:57, 16 December 2016 (UTC).

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 December 2016

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This page need new stuff, please deactivate the protection for a time 85.181.57.76 (talk) 13:58, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

  Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:38, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

To all the IP addresses who keep making edit requests

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

To all the IP addresses who keep making edit requests, if you want to make edits, create an actual Wikipedia account and auto confirm it and then you will be able to make edits to the page if they are not wp:POV. Make life easier for yourselves, create an account. Best.Resnjari (talk) 02:42, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 December 2016

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

You have to put the Foreign relations! 78.55.68.234 (talk) 19:31, 27 December 2016 (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:55, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 December 2016

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It would be also good to change something on the transportation ( like in the economy page all in all) 78.55.68.234 (talk) 19:33, 27 December 2016 (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:56, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 December 2016

Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Put this: Albania ranks high in:

Global Peace Index; 54 http://static.visionofhumanity.org/sites/default/files/GPI%202016%20Report_2.pdf

Social Progress Index: 52 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Social_Progress_Index 78.55.68.234 (talk) 19:59, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:52, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
  Not done for now: I don't recall seeing these figures in other country articles; however, if it can be shown that these are depicted in other-country infoboxes and articles, then they may be introduced here in this article.  Paine Ellsworth  u/c 13:21, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 January 2017

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Albania has been inhabited by the illyrians* put it in the first information in the top 85.179.116.152 (talk) 19:33, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  Paine Ellsworth  u/c 22:28, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 January 2017

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

port of durres is one of the biggest on the adriatics, put it on the transportation )panorama photo of durres with port 77.180.153.109 (talk) 20:50, 6 January 2017 (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. — Sam Sailor 00:19, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

change ((Macedonia)) to ((Republic of Macedonia|Macedonia)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:541:4305:c70:74eb:a2f8:5e2b:a704 (talk • contribs)

  Not done: Unlinked [[Macedonia]]. The Macedonia has been linked in the above paragraph, so not necessary. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 06:43, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 February 2017

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I think that this page needs a new exact data that in this moment dont has. Statistical data in many areas are not true and they need correction. I seek your permission to do that. EfiLuko (talk) 23:17, 6 February 2017 (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. — Train2104 (talk • contribs) 00:56, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Why not admit that the country has problems that they are working to solve?

Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Someone deleted the fully cited content I had added indicating that Albania has some issues to resolve before it is admitted into the European Union. It was deleted, saying there was no need for so much information.

Well, articles on Wikipedia are to be written from a neutral point of view: the wonderful things, the problems and what is being done to solve them. See WP:NPOV I am not an administrator, so I have no authority to do anything about the content that is being deleted, but if this article is reviewed for a Wiki Project, you may have problems with the content as it now stands. All the best, Peter K Burian (talk) 22:18, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I just noticed that there is a section about the European Union which includes the content I had added about the problems that need to be solved. (I had also added a note about that in the lead of the article, but that was deleted.) Peter K Burian (talk) 23:12, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
The sections you have added constitute wp:undue. Why such a large section on foreign commentary about Albania's economy which only ranges for the past two years, especially that from Forbes magazine and the IMF. This article is meant to be a summary about Albania over time. This is not the main article about Albania's economy. If you want, you can transfer that section to the article Economy of Albania. A few sentences about Albania's budget/issues should only be in this article, in line with the other sections. Also large sections of quotes within the main body of the article are more on the wp:POV side. Otherwise one can do this for articles like Greece on its economy or the USA on its current issues with Islamophobia. Best.Resnjari (talk) 03:57, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Inaccuracies, omissions and POV issues with Ethnic map

Latest comment: 7 years ago35 comments4 people in discussion
 
Regions with a traditional presence of ethnic groups other than Albanian.

A ethnic map produced now some years back is problematic and the claim that there is a consensus around it is also a problematic claim. The map does not It claims to show areas with a traditional presence of other ethnic groups other than Albanian. It has many issues. For one its omits the Romani minority who are one of the largest ethnic communities in Albania and are a traditional community [8]. Two, it only uses 5 sources: 1)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hellenism_in_the_Near_East_1918.jpg, 2)The Albanians, a scattered people. by Philippe Rekacewicz. Monte Diplomatique. 3)Working Paper. Albanian Series. Gender Ethnicity and Landed Property in Albania. Sussana Lastaria-Cornhiel, Rachel Wheeler. September 1998. Land Tenure Center. University of Wisconsin. 4)The Virtual Jewish History Tour. Albania. By Ariel Scheib. 5)Winnifrith, Tom (2002) Badlands-borderlands: a history of Northern Epirus/Southern Albania, London: Duckworth

Apart from Winnifrith and the Lastaria-Cornhiel sources which are or can be regarded as meeting the requirements of wp:reliable and wp:secondary. Also the map makes sweeping claims by showing the whole of Southern Albania (which corresponds almost in sync with the borders claimed for "Northern Epirus", not even Sotiriadis follows that line and the Le Monde news article shows it hatched and based it on the work of a literary critic in 1995) as having a traditional Greek presence while the sources cited for this (i am guessing is based on the map of Sotiriadis (early 20th century) has not been vetted in the scholarship literature as to whether it is based on Greek POV from the era or not and also as to why that map takes precedence over many other similar maps), well the peer reviewed ones like Winniwrith, yet on page 192 on his ethnographic map he makes no such sweeping claims and limits the Greek speaking minority roughly to what the Albanian state considers Greek with a few additions like Himara. Even Greek scholars who have done extensive field and archival work on are in line with Winnifrith (Kokolakis [9], Psomas [10] and of course Kallivretakis [11]). The map also lacks correct coordinates of some places like the Greek villages of the Vlora area of Narta and Zvernec are not highlighted in the right area (at the moment its covering the villages of Cerkovine and Hoshtime) as its slightly further south and literally both are at the Narta lagoon's entrance located on that peninsula.

The map also claims with overlap that there are Greeks in the Albanian Prespa region which was at independence and still is inhabited by ethnic Macedonians. The map also refers to "Slavic Macedonians", which in Albania is not how they are officially recognised. In Wikipedia too, they are referred to as Macedonians (ethnic group) due to much infighting over the issue. The villages of Alarup and Peshkepi near the Mali i Thate mountains and the Albanian Prespa villages of Rakickë, Zagradec and Shuec are shown as Macedonian and there is no evidence for this. The map also does not fully cover Muslim Macedonian speaking areas in Golloborda (nor does one know what that was based on, as it only shows half the area?), over colours the Macedonian speaking area in the Peshkopi area, - there were only a few settlements and they were mixed. After communism Orthodox Macedonians migrated to Macedonia leaving them only in one village Kercisht). The map also shows extensive Macedonian areas around lake Ohrid and takes in villages like Rrajce on the foothills of the Jablanica mountains and goes down all the way to Udenisht on the lake coast. There is nothing offered to corroborate that. Only Lin had/has Macedonians mixed with Albanians. While the map also omits the Gorani villages completely in Kukes province. The map also omits two Bosniak villages in the Shijak area, while in the Shkoder area the Serbian/Montenegrin minority is given territory that spans the whole lake area, when in reality those villages were/are a few and mainly a cluster in an area called Vraka. The map also refers to the Vraka area as being inhabited by only Serbian/Montenegrin when an additional community, the Podgoriçani (Muslim Slavic speakers who were expelled from Montenegro in 1878 also resettled and live there and do not regard themselves as either Serbian/Montenegrin, but Podgoriçani). The map also highlights some areas containing Vlachs more thickly (in the Dropull while omitting other areas). There is detailed research on this as per Thede Kahl ([12] - i have the book for that map too and he gives a very big village list). Why should this map be used when its full of inaccuracies, omissions, POV and poorly researched on complex issues such as demographics? We can discuss on how to make the map accurate, as i have a much peer reviewed scholarship on this stuff and none of it from Albania. Resnjari (talk) 08:15, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

You are right that the map does not cover every possible community that lives on Albanian soil, nor it displays their areas. But you are missing the point; the map does not claim to show all and every community, but the ones that are of interest to the scholars and academics. The map furthermore shows, not the official census of the Albanian government (it doesn't have to), but the estimes of academics and scholars regarding the minority areas in the country. The fact that the scholars did not cover all and every of the possible different communities that live in Albania does not make their work "biased" or "dubious" as you claim. Please refrain from ever removing sourced material like how you did now.
Your opinions and your knowledge you have about certain areas in Albania may be different from the ones the scholars have and which are reflected on the map (which is absolutely natural), but this does not give you the right to decide and remove other's work just because you don't agree with theirs. -- SILENTRESIDENT 08:22, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
I am not missing the point, nor am i citing the official Albanian government census. Its about accuracy, its about being precise. I am referring to scholarship, i.e content based on facts. The Jewish community is highlighted in urban areas and a source is used for that. Ok, fine, but what of the Romani ? They are in the many tens of thousands in Albania and there is much written on that to the point that even the UN has a database for that ! How do you explain their omission from the map ? What about the Gorani, much written on that and i can go on with this. As for a particular community being of interest to scholars, they all are. All it takes is to look up something. There are guidelines on this, i.e: WP:DISPUTED. The onus is on you to show that the map is not WP:POVPUSH. This map needs a overhaul.Resnjari (talk) 08:36, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
This again is just your OPINION. Nothing more, nothing less. I do not know the reason the scholars focused on some minorities and not on others. But this does not mean you can dispute and question their work on the grounds that "not every minority or community is included". A work is just a work - it may contain more information about one subject and lack about another subject. This does not make it biased. A scholar may not provide all the information you seek - hence why in Wikipedia we cite multiple sources from multiple scholars to present all possible information and cover everything - i.e. the minorities in our case here.
Actually the map has biased bits especially in relation to the spread of Greeks in Albania . A map from the 1920s is used which is wp:or as there are many other maps that a different from that one (why Sotiriadis only?) while recent scholarly work (Greek too) all but debunkes it (see: Koklakkis, Psomas and Kallivretakis which all contradict this, not to mention the map by Winnifrith too). The Le Monde map too is not from a peer reviewed source, but a news outlet. In Wikipedia, wp:reliable and wp:secondary always comes first so as to prevent wp:fringe from occurring. The map has multiple issues needing to be addressed. For one many parts of the map show wp:undue while omitting other communities that are large, larger than some of the others. Until the author of this map can address some of the issues those tags are more than apt.Resnjari (talk) 08:55, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
If you happen to have any new information about these minorities not covered in that map, you are welcome to add them, just make sure to cite the sources. -- SILENTRESIDENT 08:43, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
I have heaps. Thing is about the editor who composed the map, not sure if he going to make the changes. Or should i ?
Nope. You can not edit this map to change its information and remove its sources to suit your POV. The behavior of removing sources or changing the map information to suit your POV is not tolerated in Wikipedia. However there is no problem in citing new sources and even maps that reflect them. But by no means you can make or edit a map to suit your POV. The idea here is to represent as much information as possible, from as many different sources as possible, not to question or remove a particular scholarly work just because it does not suit certain POVs.
Like I said: you are right that the particular map does not reflect upon certain minorities in Albania and I agree with this. But your methods are wrong: removing sourced information does not fix the problem, only makes things worse. -- SILENTRESIDENT 09:05, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
I am not going to remove it. I want to know who is going to put the hard effort into fixing it. If Alexikoua wants to do it, fine. He will need to use google maps and soviet military maps giving precise location of settlements alongside the material. None of this roughly its here type thing (like i pointed out with the Narta issue and other places too). Also i have a lot of stuff for him to read then, some in German in relation to Slavic speaking minorities on fieldwork done recently. There is a lot out there. Best.Resnjari (talk) 09:28, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
What a nonsense. You are asking to replace the map's sources with different ones, not to fix it. Please, enough with your POV. -- SILENTRESIDENT 10:02, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
I have the sources. If you want to participate that's fine.Resnjari (talk) 10:59, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Actually the expression " traditional presence of ethnic groups other than Albanian" doesn't imply a majority. However, I admit if we should be precise the Greek inhabited area should be slighlty extented to the north based on the maps of Monde Diplomatique [[13]] (labelled as regions of "Greek majority") and the map of the CIA report on Albania [[14]] (region of significant Greek populations). On the hand, if we should term a map as POV this is the one of the highly disputed 2011 census. Thus, per wp:SECONDARY, ACADEMIC there is no reason to remove a map that shows the traditional presence of the various ethnic groups.Alexikoua (talk) 10:26, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Wait Le Monde overrides wp:secondary and wp:reliable Winnifrith, Kokolakkis, Psomas and Kallivretakis. Your serious right ? Le Monde makes a claim that the hatched area in orange is "Zones a majorite grecque" or Greek majority zones, not sure though what their basis is as they don't give one. Even though they cover Kolonje part of the Korca area, Gjirokaster, Saranda and the Himara area they still don't go as far as you do in your map, not even Sotiriadis (Just out of curiosity since you stand by Le Monde maps, they have a ethnic map of Macedonia. In that they colour even Greek Prespa as being Albanian ? Are they correct there ? [15]). In your map you have also coloured areas that have a Muslim Albanian population where no Christian populations reside or have affiliated with Greek identity in a late 19th century or early 20th century context, since you refer to traditional. The spread of Greek in the map regarding Greek identity is a little bit off here. Why do you have a separate Vlach category then, considering they identified as Greeks traditionally both in the late 19th and early 20th century and once again. Shouldn't they be Greek? If you have them separate then should areas were Orthodox Albanians (or Orthodox Albanian speakers for those who might be offended in calling them Albanians) reside not be coloured as Greek as its POV? Because what of the Orthodox Albanians, do they exist in this framework ? As you refer to traditional, what do you mean by Greek (is it in terms of identity/religious affiliation, being Greek speaking, both or other)? Or is this being selective. Also lets work out some things here. Why is Sotiriadis chosen as a map to base your map on when there is a multitude of other such maps showing different distributions? Have you vetted Sotiriadis? I have, but i will wait on a reply from you. Also the CIA report was published in 1994. Winnifrith which you have used in your map is from 1999 and in no way covers the area of the CIA map as Greek. Kokolakis shows a similar thing in the late 19th/early20th century to Winnifrith, Psomas refers to the issues of Orthodox Albanians being between Hellenism and Albanianism. Kallivretakis also confines Greeks to a southerly region similar to Albanian sources based on his fieldwork. Funny that. By the way, the CIA intelligence memorandum is a primary document. Using them has issues, see: WP:PRIMARY where it states that "Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation." Resnjari (talk) 10:59, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Resnjari, you are not convincing. If your concern is that certain minorities are not represented accurately on a map, there is always the option of making a new map using different reliable sources and post it (Wikipedia in fact favors representing all views regarding a matter). But I don't see that here. What I see in your responses to me and editor Alexikoua is that you want to remove or replace the map and the scholarly views/estimes it represents, which goes against Wikipedia's policy to not favor a particular information about the minorities or push the article to display a certain view about the minorities in the country. Your argument that the map should be removed just because you find it POV is rather disturbing, means that you have not understood a basic rule of Wikipedia which is the WP:NOS which clearly states that reliable sources may be non-neutral: a source's reputation for fact-checking is not inherently dependent upon its point of view.
Like I said, and I hate repeating myself many times: you can add different views from reliable sources and you have my wholeheart support for this, but I firmly disagree with the replacement or removal of information/views that do not suit your POV. -- SILENTRESIDENT 12:07, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
I am all fine for making a new map to replace this one. As for "Wikipedia in fact favors representing all views regarding a matter" that is true if its based on solid sources. As the policy WP:AEIS states: "Wikipedia articles usually rely on material from reliable secondary sources. Articles may make an analytic, evaluative, interpretive, or synthetic claim only if that has been published by a reliable secondary source." The above map uses two such sources (omits part of their content i.e Winnifrith is used only for the Vlachs etc, and then uses other non reliable sources to make far reaching and POV claims (Le Monde etc). Have a look at the sources used and compare it with the policy you cited to me and see if they add up. Then come back to me. I am about being precise.Resnjari (talk) 12:15, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
For future reference both Le Monde Diplomatique and CIA are reliable and top graded sources. In case you make a new map you need take into account both of the above maps (personally speaking I dont believe that and the CIA could ever spread nonsense in serious confidential documents). Taking the above into account, I suggest to extent the Greek inhabited area slightly north (especially in se Albania) in order to be 100% precise per CIA & Monde Diplomatique. Best.Alexikoua (talk) 13:04, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
So wait, you want me to use a CIA document that is one a primary source document (and contravene Wikipedia policy) and a memorandum (not a report and the declassified document itself states). Wiki policy states clearly that secondary sources need to back it up, see: WP:AEIS). The Le Monde map has many reliability issues and scholarship does not back it up. On Sotiriadis, you still have not given a reply as to why that map was to be placed above all others like it from that era for the composition of the map you made. In the end its about being precise Alexikoua. Best.Resnjari (talk) 13:21, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
L' M. Diplomatique is a top graded source and the specific article of it fits wp:SECONDARY and ACADEMIC. I don't know what you mean that 'it has issues'. The CIA paper can be hardly considered as beeing unreliable. In general I see no issues. However some minor scale redrawing may be fine. As far I know we once aggreed in the past in the correspondent section in Northern Epirus article, so I really wonder what made you change your opinion ( [[16]] even the text you aggreed defines this region in detail).Alexikoua (talk) 14:39, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

We agreed in the Northern Epirus article ? When did this happen ? On the CIA source, it is a declassified memorandum (it states that on the document itself) and is wp:primary. Wikileaks has heaps of content like that. If using that there is ok, i can use heaps of American intelligence on the Albania-Greece relation article. In 2015 once you said to me that primary sources are not to be used. The same hold trues here of this source. On the L' M. Diplomatique, why is it in contradiction of the scholarship ? Please locate for me at least peer reviewed sourcea that substantiates that Albanians are only 30%-50% of the population in the Korca, Kolonja, Gjirokaster and Saranda areas and that there is high numbers of Greeks there ? You still have not offered an explanation and instead just saying this is it, accept it. You recently placed a POV tag for a peer reviewed source which was not to your liking about is being " typical ultranationalistic Albanian pov" [17]. How can i be certain that that map has not recycled typical ultranationalistic Greek pov from Vorio Epirot lobbies, Greek right wing groups wanting to 'liberate' the area etc? I ask because that map contradicts, three in depth Greek peer reviewed sources by Kallivretakis, Psomas and Kokolakkis. Give me sources so then i desist. Also you have not explained why Sotiriadis is the map to base part of the map data on?Resnjari (talk) 07:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Resnjari's complaints have raised my suspicion because I clearly remembered this map staying here unchallenged for a very long time without Resnjari ever complaining about it before. And thus, I conducted now a small investigation on the map's prior removal and Resnjari's unexpected reactions to its recovery: I found that the map was in fact removed recently by a disruptive editor, Iaof2017, notorious for his problematic and unecyclopedic edits on various other Albanian articles, where editors again warned him for similar changes. Guess how this editor removed the sourced map: he disguised it as "Spelling Checks" and he has failed to provide any explanation for the removal of reliable and sourced material. Here we go: [18]. But history log also shows that the unexplained removal of reliable and sourced content is not the only problem: cc violations and other issues too are found in there. Thankfully Dr.K. and Alexikoua spotted this editor in time before it got worse, with Dr.K. even warning him on his Talk for cc problems his edits have caused to the page: [19]. It baffles me how Resnjari, given that he never complained about this map before (prior to its removal by Iaof2017) either here on Albania or on Northern Epirus, in all of sudden, objects to the map's restoration. Such behaviors will not be tolerated. I recommend that Resnjari drops the stick and slowly backs off before this gets worse.
EDIT: Given this POV claim incident here, I will be doing further investigation on other Balkan-related articles and will highlight possible problems on their relevant talk pages and will be watching more closely the developments in there. Regards, -- SILENTRESIDENT 16:32, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Suspicions ? The map was challenged by me because i have the sources now and feel confident in raising the points i have made as before i did not not have the data within my possession. The sources should guide the discussion, not the editor or personal of views of an editor by other editors. I hope your not making indirect intimidation [20] or other with your comments of "before this gets worse" and trying to stifle editing of other editors by saying that "behaviors will not be tolerated". See wp:civil and wp:harass for more.Resnjari (talk) 07:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

(unindent) There is absolutely nothing wrong or POV with the map. There is no requirement that maps be sourced to 20 different sources (which would be impossible). Even one source is sufficient, provided it is good enough. Second, Le Monde Diplomatique is a rock solid source, as good as we can hope for. Any arguments as to why it does not meet WP:RS cannot be taken seriously. This whole "there aren't enough sources AND they are not good enough" has a whiff of "the food at this restaurant sucks AND the portions are too small!". Furthermore, the map does not claim that Greeks are a majority in the blue region, only that it shows area where there are Greeks and other minorities. And in that respect, it is 100% accurate. As far as the Roma, we all know that Roma are scattered all over the place, and they are moreover nomadic, so it's impossible to show them on a map (even the Romani people article doesn't have maps showing precise locations of Roma communities. And even if that weren't true, that would still be not a reason to remove the map. On the other hand, if we want to look at inaccurate and POV maps, the map based on the Albanian census, now that's definitely POV and needs to go (see below). Athenean (talk) 00:24, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

The data exists. If an editor makes a map purporting to be about ethnic minorities and so on, they should make an effort to do an extensive search before making claims that the map represents the traditional space of minorities. As for finding 20 sources, you would surprised what one can find out there by doing a simple google books and google scholar search within the first few minutes. By the way the claim that the Romani cannot be ascertained for is bogus. The UN has a detailed database listing where the Romani are in Albania. Data exists. If one makes a map claiming to represent the space of traditional minorities they should find out how many minorities are and info firstly to at least say i made an attempt to cover that. The mapmaker has not even said that to me thus far. What of the Gorani, the Bosniaks etc etc? Why are a few hundred Jews shown who are an urban minority like the bulk of the Romani, but the Romani are difficult to show ? The map is inaccurate. Also the map in question follows the traditional Northern Epirus line of claim by Greeks that neither of sources used show. The map maker himself has noted shortcomings in the above comments which you sideline.Resnjari (talk) 07:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
What's important in the case of Greeks is that the map is supported by a variety of sources both SECONDARY and ACADEMIC. A traditional Greek presense is recorded in this region, thus there is nothing more to do about it. About the Gorani/Roma presence I'm still waiting for the correspondent material (maps) to make the appropriate adjustments.Alexikoua (talk) 08:57, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, which ones? Certainly not Kallivretakis, Psomas or Kokolakkis. I am still waiting for the "variety of sources both SECONDARY and ACADEMIC"? Also wasn't sure if you are going to make adjustments on your map ? I started making a new one on a bigger map template than the small one you used. I provided the UN data on the Roma in the above UN link. Also for a more abbreviated statistics see page xxiv by De Soto who was on the team who compiled the UN database [21], in terms of numbers as being a big minority (as some in here have expressed that the Romani are insignificant). On Muslim Slavic speaking minorities see Islam in Albania#Ethno-linguistic composition. There i have placed multiple sources and inlines from recent peer reviewed studies as a starting off point and some of those sources have online links to other material.Resnjari (talk) 09:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Actually Kallivretakis, Psomas and Kokkolakis do not contradict this map. For example Kallivretakis simply states that there must be not significant Greek population outside of the area of his study. Kokkolakis' research is about Yannina Vilayet (i.e. Korce, isn't part of this Vilayet).Alexikoua (talk) 09:31, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
True Kallivretakis states this. However he also does not depict areas which you have depicted as Greek being Greek. And gives a village by village breakdown. He also notes that Greek sources considered Orthodox Albanians as Greeks or Albanian speaking Greeks. What is your map inferring then? Is it supporting that position ? Psomas in his study does not support your map and goes into the reasons. He states that the region had an Albanian speaking majority with Orthodox Albanians that overwhelmingly had a pro-Greek outlook and that Greek speaking Greeks were little to be found north of the Vjosa apart from being in Korca. The change of outlook occurs with the placement of the border, return of Orthodox Albanian immigrants with an Albanian outlook etc etc. Kokkolakis study takes in two thirds of the area which you have shown as Greek on your map. You have used Sotiriadis, how is that accurate ?Resnjari (talk) 09:41, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
I fail to see any map in the works of Psomas, Kallivretakis, Kokolakis. What I've stated is that they did not dismiss this map, for example Kallivretakis doesn't claim that no "Greek soul" exists in Korce/Permet etc.. In general the map isn't my imagination and it's based on maps presented by wp:SECONDARY, ACADEMIC (Diplomatique etc.).Alexikoua (talk) 12:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
There is, in Kokolakis. Consult the source and you will come across it. Page numbers on that one are 53-56 and info on map is pp. 370-371 and the map itself is p. 374. Kallivretakis, a source which i came by through you (so you are more than familiar with) and gives a very thorough list for the Gjirokaster, Saranda districts and also the Himara area. He looked at the details of past sources and concludes it is the same ethno-linguistic situation in most areas, separate to urbanisation and emergence on a handful of new villages etc and notes this on p.35 directly contradicting the Le Monde map. Also Kallivretakis does not claim that there are no members of the Greek minority in urban centres or other places. If anything your map misses Greeks found in Tirana, Durres, those north in Shkoder due to eoloyment migration during communism and Enver's (forced) relocations etc as per Berxholi, Protopapa and Prifti [22], pp: 430-431. The way you can go about that on your map (as all urban centres have Albanian majorities) is to have the city name and then in brackets underneath have a symbol like the blue coloured G for Greeks, say Green ? S/M for Serbs Montenegrins, Purple ? R for the Romani, Red ? A for Aromanians etc. You need a bigger map template. On Psomas (its the whole thing, but) see pp. 238, 240-242, 243-244, 247-249, 250-251, 252, 253-260, 261-283. The Le Monde map is in direct contradiction of all three Greek academic sources and you still have not backed it up showing that is based on wp:secondary and wp:reliable. Its about being precise.Resnjari (talk) 13:10, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

(unindent) Le Monde Diplos is WP:RS. If you feel it isn't you can go to WP:RSN, but be prepared to be disappointed. No one is claiming Greeks are a majority in the highlighted areas, only a "presence", so no one is contradicting anyone. And the sources you mention only cover a small area, not the whole of Albania. If we were to combine them to produce a map, that would be WP:SYNTH. Khirurg (talk) 16:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Have a look at the Le Monde map, it claims that Albanians in the Korca, Kolonja, Gjirokaster and Saranda districts are between 30-50% of the population. Who makes up the other 50% considering it has hatched lines for a Greek presence? Apart from the Greek sources their are other academics who have traversed the country and given assessments [23]. As for my sources they don't contradict and are wp:secondary and wp:reliable. Many maps on Wikipedia combine sources as long as they are reliable and steeped in the scholarship. Otherwise so many maps would not exist on Wikipedia. Also if we go by your rationale, Alexikoua's map is already WP:SYNTH using 5 sources that have been combined (with claims it purports to show some kind of accurate picture of the state of things). Would that mean that it warrants removal for being WP:SYNTH? In the end that mapp will go to WP:RSN. I am just seeing were the discussion will go, as per policy before i take it further.Resnjari (talk) 19:15, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
After checking Kallivretakis carefully I admit that he virtually agrees with this map: By saying that the Greek population in Permet and Korca must not be significant he off course can not mean that it's non existent. I also note that Le Monde map is accepted in bibliography, for example: [orientalreview journal. There is also this book that dedicates a chapter about the Greek minority with [[24]] in p. 1617, that agrees with the specific area.Alexikoua (talk) 21:21, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
On the Russian journal, it also has a map of the 4 Albanian vilayets, a similar map which you recently deleted from the Albania page [25]. I take it one map is ok, but the other is not ? Also that particular article is noted for being an editorial and also it does not list references nor acknowledge its sources for where it even got its images. Peer reviewed journals do this. Heck even Wikipedia does this and is strict on this. On the about page, it says it was formed by political analysts and freelance bloggers. Peer reviewed journals only accept content by scholars (for the humanities for example: historians, sociologists, linguists, anthropologists etc) and not freelance bloggers. Those scholars may blog, but those pieces do not go into a journal. This this an opinion piece? Also the person who wrote that particular article is Andrew Korybko who works for Sputnik agency [26]. The issue of Sputnik being a reliable source has already been called into question on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 205#Sputnik_News for being a Russian government mouth piece. I have seen you be very strict and dismissive of other sources in past times for having less issues than this. In the policy article on wp:secondary, it does say "Information in an article must be verifiable in the references cited." On the other source, apart from not being able to see what that map was based on, it makes the claims that areas inhabited compactly by the Greeks minority (Dropull, Pogon, Vurg) are mixed with Albanians. ??? Albanians don't inhabit those areas and the map is already POV pushing. Kallivretakis fieldwork refutes this (so does Winnfrith, p.192) and Psomas backs Kallivretakis findings many years later). The map also excludes the Himara area of having Greeks. Kind of weird, no ? It also makes the hatched line go up Albanian Prespa inhabited by Macedonians. ??? There are other problems with the map. It shows the area of Ohrid and Eastern Macedonian Prespa as being mixed with Albanians where once again there are no Albanians in the villages and in Ohrid city and Resen town they are a minority. Prespa Albanian villages are in the east and scattered in the area shown as Macedonian. It shows the Brodec municipality as being ethnically mixed with Turks which is false. Macedonian speaking villagers who have declared themselves as Turks in census are in Plasnica town and clustered around it through a few villages to the south of that municipality. It omits Albanians of the Kumanovo region (Lipkovo area) and the Karshiaka (below Skopje) where they are compact, have their municipalities. It omits significant Serbian majority/clusters areas in Kosovo, separate to the north, etc etc. Kallivretakis does not refer to villages, but cities, in line with Berxholli source. Nitsiakos did fieldwork in Greek villages of the Permet area. The map still shows areas way out of that zone as being Greek or having Greeks.Resnjari (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Also note, the map is very small, so we cannot possibly show individual towns, let alone villages. Saying "oh, it doesn't show that these and these villages are Albanian, therefore it needs to be removed" is highly disingenuous. These sound like excuses to remove the map. At the end of the day, Le Monde Diplomatique is 100% reliable. Your opinions about their map being inaccurate are irrelevant. You can always email them though, see what they say. Khirurg (talk) 21:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Its showing areas that not even the Greek state itself in its official view [27] of the demography of the area in 1919 viewed as Greek, i.e Albanian Muslim villages. Its not disingenuous and its about being precise. I placed Greek sources that meet proper scholarship criteria in my above posts. Wikipedia is a encyclopedic project and content needs to reflect the polices of wp:reliable and secondary. Otherwise if its a free for all then one can plonk anything here or in other places such as making a map on Greece's demographics showing this that or the other based on problematic sources. That the map template use is small is another issue. Needs to be bigger for accuracy.Resnjari (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
It would also be much more helpful if you made a bulleted list of specific changes you want made to the map, so that we can then discuss them. "The map is POV" is not very helpful. Khirurg (talk) 21:55, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Making a bulleted list is a good idea. Will do over next few days due to complexity of subject matter for whoever makes a map. Best.Resnjari (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Albania/Archive_7&oldid=1143725489"