Talk:Ceraunian Mountains

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ceraunian Mountains. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091202133428/http://old.perseus.tufts.edu:80/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry= to http://old.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%2356788

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) 15:39, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Malet e Vetëtimës

Wouldn't Malet të Vetëtimës would be grammatically correct? The source says "e". It's masculine (pl.), indefinite form (or def., but that does not matter in this case) and genitive, isn't it? If that is so, "te" would be correct. AlexBachmann (talk) 23:14, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

The correct form is "Malet e Vetëtimës". The plural indefinite form would be "Male të Vetëtimës" but it is not used. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:21, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! AlexBachmann (talk) 00:19, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Name change

@Khirurg: Your argument to reverting the name back to the Cerunian Mountains is that it's a long standing name (in Wikipedia??) used by sources (greek sources??). This is an article about a mountain range in ALBANIA. Like all the names of the peaks within the range, the name should and can only be in Albanian. When an outside reader looks at the article the way it is written and structured, giving it a greek theme, as if to say it's a greek mountain range or a mountain range belonging in a greek region, it's dishonest and false. The Albanian Encyclopedic Dictionary, the authoritative, state sanctioned source for naming regions and toponyms of places in Albania refers to the range as Malet e Vetëtimës. The local soccer team of Himara was for decades called Vetëtima e Himarës. There is little to no rationale in giving the range some supposed name from antiquity. We use official sources here. Kj1595 (talk) 17:51, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

No, actually, we don't use "official sources". We use the most common name, as determined by Wikipedia naming policies: WP:NCGN. You can't just move a page just like that, you have to file a move request. But from what I can tell, "Ceraunian Mountains" is far more common [1] than "Malet e Vetetimes [2]. Khirurg (talk) 18:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

For how to move a page, see [3]. If it's even remotely controversial, you can't just move a page over other user's objections, it's a form of edit-warring. If it continues I will be notifying admins. Khirurg (talk) 18:22, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@Kj1595: You just removed a whole bunch of very well-sourced material using a very nationalistic-sounding edit-summary. You can't do that. Sourced material cannot be removed just because you don't like it. By the way, is there a reason you never capitalize "Greek"? I noticed that. Khirurg (talk) 18:38, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Improving content

@Daniel Case: Hi there. If you look at my contribution to this article, I didn't simply remove content, I improved it. I added important information regarding the range's geology, its peaks and so on. The article as it were had serious and dishonest flaws for any objective reader. Why is there a Greek translation in the introduction of an article about a mountain range in Albania? That in itself is a red flag. It implies the range being in a "historic greek region". We can equally apply that same logic in the article about the city of Ioannina which was not only ruled by an Albanian warlord during the 19th century, it was in fact populated by Albanians as historical maps suggest. Should we add an Albanian translation as an introduction to that city's article if we are to follow this train of thought? The piece in the history section that was removed mentions a mythological war? Really? And what does that have to do with a geography article about a mountain range? Content is removed and improved in Wiki articles all the time. Who is to decide what stays and what doesn't? Kj1595 (talk) 04:22, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, I'm glad you have decided to raise these questions on the talk page. I really can't speak to most of them, except the article's name as reflecting what the range is commonly known by in English ... certainly on the Albanian Wikipedia it would use its Albanian name, but I wouldn't recognize it here.

As for your other questions, perhaps Khirurg can answer them. Daniel Case (talk) 04:27, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

But you did remove all the important information about the range that I had added?? Should I wait for Khirurg's approval for the content to be added back? Who is to decide that Khirurg's content is more credible or valuable than mine? Kj1595 (talk) 04:34, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Nice to see you are discussing finally. I wonder why. Anyway, you may add relevant sourced material, but you may not remove it just because it bothers you. Not only is the name of the mountains of Greek origin (the Albanian name is a translation of the Greek name, which is attested in ancient sources), but both now and in antiquity, the towns and villages of the range are inhabited by ethnic Greeks. There are no "red flags" of any kind, only reliably sourced material. In fact, the fact that you think that adding anything Greek-related to the article is a "red flag", is in itself an actual "red flag". Khirurg (talk) 19:13, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

wp:IDONTLIKEIT selective removal of scholarship

First we have Filos [[4]] (on the precise chronological context), then Mikko [[5]] (on the geographical context) removed: Both of them are mainstream and top graded scholars not to mention that there is also Hernandez & Dominguez that provide a more clear picture here. Selective removal of bibliography because it doesn't fit a specific wp:POV is counter-productive. If there is a disagreement in scholarship then all views should be present (& not removing those that we don't like by claiming that's OR).Alexikoua (talk) 20:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Unnecessary POV edit

This edit [6] introduced unnecessary POV content, which by the way is not supported directly by the cited source. The source explicitly states: "che si estende dal Golfo di Ambracia fino a Capo Linguetta (penisola del Karaburun) e al Monte Qelqës" ["which extends from the Gulf of Ambracia to Capo Linguetta (Karaburun Peninsula) and Mount Qelqës"] Capo Linguetta is the original Italian name of the Karaburun Peninsula, and it is also clarified in brackets by the author of the relevant paper. So this source says the extact thing that is already extensively described in the article citing numerous sources. – Βατο (talk) 21:34, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Alexikoua discuss your POV edit here in talk page and avoid an edit war, please. – Βατο (talk) 21:36, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Also, can you explain what is the point of your edit? Kepi i Gjuhëzës and the western part of the Karaburun Peninsula is uninhabitable and protrudes thoroughly into the sea. – Βατο (talk) 21:48, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Bato: Can you pleaae translate this part from it:wikipedia: Capo Linguetta è la parte estrema della penisola di Karaburun. Capo Linguetta in modern terms is obviously part of Karaburun peninsulla and not the entire peninsulla. Googlemaps is also clear when you type 'cape Linguetta' since it returns this: [[7]]. Nevertheless if you still believe that this is POV (googlemaps etc) there is yet a dozen of scholarship which supports the fact Epirus stretches all along the Albanian Ionian coast (don't forget that you also removed Mikko among others pretenting yet again disruption). Alexikoua (talk) 23:59, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Italian Capo Linguetta has been originally used to refer to the Karaburun Peninsula ([8]), but it is irrelevant, the source you used explicitly states Capo Linguetta (penisola del Karaburun), so no need for WP:OR interpretations and wikilinking. Also you still have to explain the point of your edit. The relevant ancient content associated with the subject of this article is already extensively described. Protruding thoroughly into the sea, the uninhabited Karaburun Peninsula separates the sea, not the land. And Kepi i Gjuhëzës was unaccessible from the land to be considered part either of Epirote or Illyrian territory. Also the wording that Epirus stretched north up to Kepi i Gjuhëzës would be POV, becasue it would imply other areas to the north of the Ceraunian mountains, going against bibliography (although I know you are trying to impose that narrative, it won't work). If you insist on including some info on that, provide a reasonable argument why, then we could include a possibly appropriate wording saying that the western part of the Promontory belonged to the Epirote coast and the eastern one to the Illyrian coast. But I think it is unnecessary, the article is balanced and enough informative in the context of classical antiquity. – Βατο (talk) 00:40, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

It appears you still confuse old (original) terms with modern ones. Let me help you by citing Mikko who is quite helpfull (on the northern boundary of Epirus): 6 Hammond 1967, 7. The names of places have changed since his visits in the 1930s, and proved surprisingly difficult to find. Fortunately, Roisman and Worthington 2010, 280 offer some clarification as to the names. Cape Linguetta equates to the Acroceraunian Promontory or Karaburun Peninsula, located on the opposite side of the bay near the town of Vlorë. That's actually a quite usefull description and needs to be added in the relevant section. There is also the map in Roisman and Worthington 2010 p. xxv which clearly points on the Acroceraunian promontory (=Linguetta) which lies directly west of Vlore. Moreover Rinaldi is a modern scholar and she uses geographic terms the correct way as they are used in our modern-era.Alexikoua (talk) 02:33, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

There is also Katicic about the northern border of Epirus on the Acroceraunian promontory [[9]] p. 120, and S. Kos 2006 to name a few.Alexikoua (talk) 02:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

By the way the idea that this area was uninhabited can't be used as an argument that it wasn't part of Epirus in geographical terms. I can't really understand this kind of argument here. Bibliography is quite strong here. Alexikoua (talk) 02:48, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Actually, you are confusing terms and deep into WP:OR. With those sources you just confirmed what I was talking about, that Cape Linguetta is equated to the Karaburun Peninsula by those sources, not your original research that wikilinked it with Cape of Gjuhëz [10]. Those sources provide information that is already included into the article: "In classical antiquity the Ceraunian Mountains represented a natural border between the historical and geographical regions of Illyria and Epirus." The Ceraunian mountains, the subject of this article, comprise the whole range, including the Karaburun promontory. You can add those sources after that sentence if you want, as they are in agreement with it. – Βατο (talk) 09:02, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Before making the necessary additions here, do you agree that the Acroceraunian promontory (current Karaburun peninsula) formed the northern border of Epirus? (cited by: Demiraj, Mikko, Katicic etc.) Alexikoua (talk) 02:01, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

No, the whole Ceraunian Mountains, including the Karaburun/Acroceraunian Peninsula, formed the border between Epirus and Illyria. It is already stated and appropriately sourced. I noticed that you keep treating these mountains as if they were part of Epirus only. They were between two historical regions. And it is already extensively and accurately explained with due weight into the article. It's enough. If you persist pushing POV narratives into this Albanian mountain range article you will be reverted. Before making controversial additions, you have to seek consensus. If you keep ignoring my advices, I will seek help from administrators. – Βατο (talk) 10:22, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

The current article offers the wrong impression that the northernmost limit of Epirus is on Llogara, while the Acroceraunian promontory is found further north. This needs to be addressed since it offers the wrong picture that the promontory was considered part of Illyria. Removing a mountain of bibliography (Demiraj, Katicic, Suhha, etc) simply because they are stating this fact needs admin intervention indeed. Alexikoua (talk) 23:16, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

No "mountian of bibliography" was removed, the sources you mentioned are in perfect agreement with the current content of the article, and they can be added as well. Acroceraunian mountains are part of the Ceraunian mountain range. Not to mention that many authors use Akrokeraunian/Acroceraunian mountains as synonym for Keraunian/Ceraunian mountains. In the satellite map you can easly see the mountain chain that makes a clear demarcation between these geographical regions, going from the Acroceraunian promontory down to Panormos. If the (although accurate) information about Llogara chain gives you some concern, I would agree removing it hoping that this measure will put an end to this long discussion. – Βατο (talk) 23:42, 11 June 2023 (UTC)