Talk:Ilirida

Proposal for deletion.

Yeah sorry but this is a bit ridiculous. Quite literally 40 people here, in the middle of Skopje have claimed that they have declared a autonomous republic within Macedonia. http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/republic-of-ilirida-declared-in-macedonia

If it's that easy to claim such a thing and garner semi-decent media attention, it's a bit scary.

Some of the stuff in the infobox is hilarious:

Unrecognized constituent state of Macedonia Capital and largest city Skopje (claimed) Government Federal republic with elements of direct democracy President Nevzat Halili Prime Minister Baki Sulemani

Really, lol?

This is not an actual separatist movement pushing for autonomy. It's just a publicity stunt. Please delete. Futbol vic (talk) 10:45, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

For the most part I agree. I'll make some changes to it but I don't think it should be entirely deleted since this article did exist before 'proclamation' last month. --Local hero ^talk 12:49, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Revert by Soffredo

The current version of the article by Soffredo is unacceptable.

1. Where did you find that this 'state' is using the flag of the Republic of Albania? That absolutely needs a source.
2. Please explain how this 'state' is related to the 2001 conflict, with sources of course
3. The intro does not provide as a good of a summary as in the previous version since it makes no mention of the original 'declaration' of this 'state' in 1992
4. Please note that this was not at all a serious event; since maybe a few days after the recent 'declaration', there has been quite literally no news to come out of this [1]
5. The infobox contains many unverifiable claims.

So, it needs to be reverted back. --Local hero ^talk 01:14, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I will simply readd the map. [Soffredo] 20:43, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Merge with another article

Well, I think this should be merged with another article. Firstly, it is a concept not shared by an ethnic group, or any other social group of people in the Republic of Macedonia, rather it is a concept only endorsed by one very small Albanian political fraction in the country (other Albanian parties in the country have shown no endorsement for the idea), it has very low approval (even in the Albanian community see: http://www.makdenes.org/content/article/26592341.html), and only in a regional and political aspect, low media coverage and little to no reliable sources, it hasn't affected nothing to this point in the affairs of the internal or international community, it is a failed project made twice by one man (Nevzat Halili) previously in 1992, and not to mention it isn't recognized even as a concept by any other social institution in the country or elsewhere. Although I think it still deserves to be mentioned on Wikipedia, it should be in another article closely related to the subject, for example: Albanians in the Republic of Macedonia, Party for Democratic Prosperity, Nevzat Halili, or something else, doesn't matter. - Phill24th (talk). 18:13, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I support this and I think it could be mentioned on all three of the articles you listed. --Local hero ^talk 04:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

No need to merge. Nevzat Halili is different from this article, so each should have their own.MorenaReka (talk) 01:09, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

This whole thing is essentially a publicity stunt by this man that briefly made the news twice - it is not a state in any way. I'm going to redirect the article back, but if a consensus is somehow made in favor of a separate article we can undo it. --Local hero ^talk 16:41, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

No, there is a lot of political literature about it. If you want to delete it, bring it to Afd, but please don't make merges. MorenaReka (talk) 20:04, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• Strongly Oppose: For certain circles amongst Albanians in Macedonia, this irredentist concept is something that they strive for. It is important to outline this and give information. One who came up with the concept, and those who support it and its continuing usage which falls way outside the personality of Nevzat Halili. It is part of the wider corpus of Albanian nationalism, one in which articles exist in Wikipedia. I invoke the Wikipedia article of Aegean Macedonia which is also a article about a irredentist concept used by some of those of the Macedonian minority in Greece and also in Macedonia. This article should not be merged.Resnjari (talk) 20:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose merge, for Resnjari reasoning.--MorenaReka (talk) 14:26, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

The merger was proposed and completed over one year ago. I continue to support the decision per WP:NOPAGE. There's a good chance we'll never see any more news out of this idea, so we'll simply be left this inadequately-sourced stub forever. With regard to what Resnjari has said, irredentism among Albanian Macedonians is a much broader topic than one guy's self-proclaimed republic. You seem to be suggesting that we use this article to cover the irredentism which would be inappropriate as this particular 'republic' is simply a pipe dream by one guy that is not representative of Albanian separatism. If we wish to cover that, it can be put into Albanians in Macedonia if not already covered there. In addition, Greater Albania seems to encompass all the irredentist Albanian ideas. --Local hero ^talk 00:02, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

No matter what you think, Local hero, it is poor style to do two reverts when you can't find consensus. What you are doing is actually also sanctionable in Wikipedia. Please read WP:CONSENSUS and revert yourself before I go through too many lengths in convincing you why you are wrong: I wouldn't need to if you just read WP:CONSENSUS. --MorenaReka (talk) 03:25, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

@Local Hero. The same can be said about Aegean Macedonia, about it being part of the about the article on Macedonian nationalism and no longer warranting a separate article. Halili gave a voice to those irredentist circles. And the name Illirida still lingers on outside the personality of Halili (e.g. soccar matches and other provocative politicians from time to time). Also the topic has somewhat extensive coverage (in non-Albanian) scholarship. Google books (first 3 pages and somewhat scattered thereafter) [[2]] and google scholar: [[3]]. These things have not been taken into consideration when the merge was proposed and occurred. Also about "pipe dreams", true, though no ones knows. See> wp:crystal ball. Regarding consensus too, it was basically you and an other editor. Now there are other editors also involved. The topic is about a proposed state amongst a minority who is of considerable number in Macedonia.Resnjari (talk) 07:08, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Not only he hasn't achieved consensus, but, as I demonstrated with my latest edits, the Republic of Ilirida is not intrinsically linked to the figure of Nevzat Halili; way too many political figures are involved with it, so a merge of the article to Halili makes no sense whatsoever. In addition I can't make those edits to the page of Halili, as he is not linked to other people making declarations about Ilirida such as Abdurahman Haliti or Muhamed Halili. The article is about the Republic of Ilirida and Nevzat Halili doesn't have ownership of the Republic.MorenaReka (talk) 15:57, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

MorenaReka, you didn't even give me an opportunity to revert myself - you just went ahead on your own. I'd love to have you convince me that I'm wrong, if you don't feel like going to those 'many lengths' then don't bother participating in the discussion. This article was merged into Halili's over one year ago. That discussion is over, the situation has been stable for over one year. Per WP:CONSENSUS: "Any edit that is not disputed or reverted by another editor can be assumed to have consensus. [the merge is assumed to have consensus] Should that edit later be revised by another editor without dispute, [your revision has been disputed by me] it can be assumed that a new consensus has been reached."

You decided to re-establish the page, then you were reverted, and then you reverted in return. Per WP:BRD, that's not the best way to go about things. In order to make your change, you must get a consensus.

Resnjari, if you'd like to discuss Aegean Macedonia, that can be done at the appropriate talk page. Consensus was achieved when, after two editors (Futbol Vic & Phill24th) proposed merging, I agreed, the edit was made, and then over one year passed before a dispute was made. Now, MorenaReka is trying to re-establish the page without consensus.

• Is Albanian separatism in Macedonia a notable topic that may even warrant its own article? Yes.
• Is this "republic" a serious topic that represents the entire issue of Albanian irredentism in Macedonia? No.

All coverage in books of this seems to be a one-sentence thing about Halili's declaration. --Local hero ^talk 16:31, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the matter on Aegean Macedonia my point is that such an article exists. However i am interested in your suggestion about having a article about Albanian separatism. Though that would be to limited in its scope. Something more wideranging would need to cater for such material. Instead a article called Separatism in Macedonia would be a better fit and more broader. It would also incorporate this article Republic of Vevčani which is limited just as you say of the Ilirida one as existing in its own right. If Vevcani exists then so should Ilirida, or the two merged into a article on Separatism in Macedonia (covering Albanian, Macedonian and Serb) which has come from more than one side to varying degrees from 1991 onward. Also the Serb community too up north in the early 1990s (ideas about going it alone). Thoughts on the matter from everyone ?Resnjari (talk) 17:37, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

@Local hero. Separatism in Macedonia may cover many topics including the Republic of Vevcani, but I want to discuss the Republic of Ilirida. Consensus was achieved between you and other people last year: right now, consensus is no longer on your side. I added many sources to indicate that Nevzat Halili cannot bear the weight of all this article, as many more people are involved in it, period. It seems like you have not read the sources, as the article is much more than that. If you go to googlebooks and type "Ilirida", you'll find about 600 results. I already told you that if you want to send this article to deletion, you can do it at any time, but I remind you that the article exists already in Serbian and Croatian wikis, I don't understand why it can't exist in the English one. I demonstrated to you that there are many more political forces involved than Nevzat Halili. Last, there were three experienced page patrollers who marked in the last two days the page as reviewed (see this), so it would be smart of you if you dropped this topic with intellectual honesty and stop blanking wiki pages. --MorenaReka (talk) 17:56, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Resnjari, I support your idea of creating an article on separatism in Macedonia and putting all such 'republics' into it as opposed to having multiple short standalone articles.

MorenaReka, there is no clear consensus here currently which is why the stable version (before you re-established the page) should stand until we figure out the best way to move forward. In Googlebooks, there are 207 results and most of them simply mention the 'republic' briefly and infrequently. The ones used in the article are either short snippets or books that only discuss the 'republic' with PDP and Halili. The page patrollers do not trump consensus. Their marking the page as reviewed is not an endorsement that they believe this is the best way to handle the topic. --Local hero ^talk 14:47, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

I have been looking at this matter and reflecting upon it to see on Wikipedia if there are some precedents from where we can draw upon and move forward, as its complicated. A similar all encompassing article on separatism in a state (pertaining to Pakistan) is:Separatist movements of Pakistan. In it is a overview of all separatist type movements and or concepts (for a state like Sindhudesh, similar to Ilirida) that exist or have existed in Pakistan, with links to separate articles. In a generalised article (if created) on Separatism in the Republic of Macedonia, it can cover all these small movements and concepts with some extra detail on main pages as in the Pakistan separatism page. This Ilirida thing keeps rearing its head every once in a while. It is the brainchild of some people, though amongst certain Albanian circles the name Ilirida has been used during soccer chants and demonstrations by some quarters of the wider Albanian community and also in violent actions that makes it more than Nevzat Halili's idea. A separate article probably would be better suited such as this with it having in the lede that it is a irredentist concept/separatist movement of some Albanians in Macedonia. The Ilirida article also now does contain peer reviewed information about events that go somewhat beyond Halili's few actions. Having it independent is probably most suited, as before it lacked information that went beyond Halili which the case for a merger then did suffice, though not now. Best.Resnjari (talk) 16:11, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Out of the separatist states listed in the Pakistan article, the only one with an article devoted entirely to that state/concept is Sindhudesh. The rest redirect to the regional article like Waziristan or discuss other topics in addition to the proposed state like Balawaristan. The Sindhudesh state seems to have more widespread support than Halili's state. --Local hero ^talk 16:20, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

There are two other similar articles that discusses separatism in a country and then branch out to varying degrees in separate topics about a particular separatist movement and or concept for a state. In the Indian article Separatist movements of India, there is Khalistan movement etc. While in the China article Separatist movements of China there is East Turkestan etc. So there are similar articles on such contentious topics. In the Ilirida article there is more information that give details actions that go outside Halili done in the name of Ilirida. It does have some currency among some people in the Albanian community. What would be very important is to cite in the article that it is a separatist and irredentist concept and such a sentence would need to go into the lede. It is important that this article explains ideas and events around this concept, but for it to be in no way some kind of propaganda piece like the Northern Epirus article for irredentist type wanting to use Wikipedia as a placard for other things separate to scholarship. This article even in a virtual sense should not violate the sovereignty of Macedonia. I feel very strongly about this last point.Resnjari (talk) 16:49, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I'll go through the article sometime this week and see what it looks like after re-wording the lead and making other changes. If this article is to exist on its own, I agree that the points you mention ought to be adhered to. --Local hero ^talk 20:54, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

All information about this article must be based on peer reviewed content so there is no neutrality issues and all editors going into the future need to adhere to that with this article (and others of course). As you can see on the Northern Epirus article is based on dubious sources at times, omitting a lot of Western peer reviewed material also and some of the most contentious claims it makes has no sources. From that angle, its why i say this article must reflect peer reviewed content. This Ilirida concept emerged from some in the Albanian community who thought that other means could achieve certain goals that had arisen during the problematic Yugoslav era pertaining to Albanian rights. So it should not sugercoat anything as well of where this concept came from and (violent) actions done its name. Anyway on a separate matter, i want to create village article regarding Macedonia. There is a little issue though over some villages that have the same name in Macedonia or oversees. When i changed the name of the Forino article from one that had an Albanian name, i did it as Forino, Gostivar. A admin changed it later to Forino, Macedonia. What format is followed in such instances Local for Macedonia, so there are no time wasting additional edits later?. Do i use the state or municipality to differentiate in those circumstances ? Also whereabouts is a village infobox on English Wikipedia for Macedonian settlements (if one exists)? Also when adding any additional names of a settlement in the article, i got my hands on the Macedonian census data of 2002, so there wont be issues going into the future. Best.Resnjari (talk) 10:31, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I believe it goes like this: if it's the only Forino in the world, just title it Forino; if it's the only one in Macedonia, title it Forino, Macedonia; if there are multiple in Macedonia, title it Forino, Gostivar Municipality. The census file is definitely an acceptable place to find the official names of settlements in the country. --Local hero ^talk 19:22, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for that advice and assistance. Too many versions. I was going by the formats adopted in Macedonian and Albanian wikipedia, which place the municipality name for a settlement that also has the same name. Are there Macedonian village infobox's for settlements, so i place them as i go? Best.

Sure. The best infobox is simply {{infobox settlement}}, for example in Dolno Dupeni. --Local hero ^talk 14:43, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Cool. Its funny, I edited the Prespa related articles a few weeks ago and forgot some had infoboxes. Lol. Its been one of these weeks. Thank you Local. heheResnjari (talk) 23:43, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose The topic is notable. ~ HAL333 03:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Pictures: Are the really "own work" or a copy and paste job from the net with copyright infringements here?

Guys, i have noticed recently that some editors who have don't have user name are constantly placing images of ballot paper etc on this article ? Me and Local have been removing them because we have come across similar material on the net. Can those images origin be ascertained that they are not images taken from other internet sources and placed here without acknowledgment or permissions? If these images pose copyright problems, they will be removed. If the issue continues beyond that (if concerns are not addressed by users who continuously place them here) than either i or some of the other editors will take further action. This is a serious matter as Wikipedia cannot have copyright infringements.Resnjari (talk) 12:47, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

These ones definitely did not appear to be the uploader's own work and they have been correctly deleted. They typically get deleted relatively soon in commons but sometimes it can take time and, therefore, the right thing to do is to remove it from the article when we know the images have been taken from other sites and passed as original work by the uploader even if they haven't yet been deleted. Thanks for the help Resnjari. --Local hero ^talk 23:17, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

No problem Local. Some editors are not cautious. I am going to look for some more stuff about Ilirida and it being described as secessionist/seperatist etc. This article is not going to be another POV pushing Northern Epirus rant for some editors pushing an agenda that goes against the spirit, intention and purpose of Wikipedia. Best.Resnjari (talk) 07:38, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Ilirida political symbols (coat of arms etc)

Of some time now, some editors who have no accounts but working through IP addresses have been placing state symbols attributed to Ilirida. A[part from them being difficult to ascertain if that was so, Ilirida was never a political reality but a political concept of a few within the Albanian political elite and some who backed this concept. It never gained widespread traction amongst the Albanian community anyway. I ask those editors who insist on these symbols, why is it that those symbols (of which their veracity is difficult to account for in the first place) should be included in a article that discusses a political concept that really never got of the ground more than that. I ask for a civil discussion here as frankly offensive comments written by an Albanian editor in Serbo-Croatian [4] aimed at another editor (who is of Macedonian heritage) are competently unacceptable and go against the spirit of Wikipedia (see policy: WP:civil ! A reminder to Albanian editors: Though i am of Albanian heritage i am fluent in Balkan Slavic languages and any derogatory language (such as the example given above) directed toward others i will report you and your IP(s) will be banned. Thank you.Resnjari (talk) 15:44, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

No discussion is necessary here. The "symbols" have no backing in sources and, thus, cannot stay. This page probably needs to be protected indefinitely due to the persistent vandalism. --Local hero ^talk 19:25, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree 100%. Place it up for protection. Its just become ridiculous and time wasting constantly undoing POV. Those pushing for such things don't want to even have a discussion instead restoring from going from IP to IP address and resorting to offensive language and disruptive behavior. Place page under protection. If they want to edit this article (and importantly go by Wikipedia policy) they should create a account. Resnjari (talk) 05:10, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Local hero: I haven't nominated a page to be placed for protection, so i am not fully familiar with the process. However, if time permits you to do so, do it. These editors with the multiple IP's pushing this POV is becoming ridiculous. Best.Resnjari (talk) 17:23, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Why revert

Hi Local hero, Why removed why you bother Ilirida why it bothers you all the Albanian in Macedonia why you don't mind: 1. Republic of Vevčani 2. Liberland 3. Azawad This is wrong for you, you must have a principle Please do not return

ILIRIDAproud (talk) 11:10, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

You really ought to learn English before editing here any further. Even more importantly, however, you need to read Wikipedia policies regarding adding unverifiable content. Simply read above for discussions related this topic. --Local hero ^talk 13:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

I have read all answer my question about Liberland Republic of Vevčani and Azawad ILIRIDAproud (talk) 13:53, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

The bottom line is that you are adding an infobox with information and images that you've made up and passing it off as fact. You've done this in the past either with this account or previous ones or with your Sarajevo IPs. And it doesn't stay because there is no possible way to verify population numbers, area numbers, etc. So, let's spare everyone's time and drop this. --Local hero ^talk 15:29, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

You did not answer the question,about Liberland, [[Republic of Vevčani], Azawad Why are you afraid Republic of Ilirida FYROM is our You do not have exclusive rights for fyrom macedonia ILIRIDAproud (talk) 16:24, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

@ILIRIDAproud: I'm sure you're trying to contribute in good faith, but this is English language Wikipedia, and your contributions to the content of this article are of no use if you don't comprehend our policies and guidelines. Furthermore, good faith cuts both ways, and your comments here are escalating to personal attacks aimed at another editor. Please don't compare articles per WP:WINARS: worse yet, comparing apples and oranges. The 'Republic of Ilirida' is, essentially, a fictional state. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:50, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

You do not have enough information about ILIRIDA Republic of Ilirida is not a fictional state what is for you Azawad, Republic of Vevčani, and Liberland why stay this page ILIRIDAproud (talk) 00:03, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Azawad managed to achieve self governance over half of Mali for some time even if unrecognized. Liberland has been proclaimed in a no mans land. The republic of Vevcani was declared and functioned for a short time in that settlement. Ilirida was proclaimed by a group of Albanians who claimed a territory but never managed to even govern it or assert anything more than a oprclaimation. Ilirida did not recive backing from the bulk of the Albanian community in Macedonia. During the 2001 Albanian rebellion, no one from the leadership claimed the territory they captured in the name of Ilirida. Ilirida is just a political concept for some Albanians. Placing coat of arms and other things means that it has somehow achieved governance over the teeiroty claimed (even a village). Can you provide some kind of sources to that effect so one can then justify having coat of arms, a flag etc in a infobox? Best.Resnjari (talk) 08:41, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

You can not compare ILIRIDA and Epirus Albanians has more than 509.083 thousand and Read a Albanian referendum for political and teritorial autonomy in macedonia 11 and 12 january 1992 https://sq.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendumi_p%C3%ABr_autonomi_teritoriale_dhe_politike?wprov=sfsi1 ILIRIDAproud (talk) 16:21, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Read and this http://www.sobranie.mk/arhiva-8bed31ca-f2f1-4a3f-b4ce-576fb78a2c0a-ns_article-31-sednica-91.nspx ILIRIDAproud (talk) 16:24, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

I guess you realize from this situation that there is fyrom http://www.sobranie.mk/WBStorage/Files/31sed1prod11jan92god.pdf ILIRIDAproud (talk) 16:29, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

You can have a referendum but that vote later did not eventuate into sovereignty, even if unrecognised (even in one village)? The Macedonian parliamentary sources mainly refer to the Albanian demand for autonomy, which is different from becoming a separate state. Ilirida came out from time to time when there was Albanian dissatisfaction with the Macedonian elite and state regarding socio-political issues not being addressed in the 1990s. Ilirida today comes out only sin protest banners at times or by small groups of people vying for the political limelight. Not even Ziadin Sela from Struga who advocates for federalisation of Macedonia refers to Ilirida. Please don't POV push. You continue with this you set a precedent for so called 'Northern Epirus' articles which at this point in time are in parts propagandist in style and content. This article is only about a proposed geographical and political concept and should be left that way unless god forbid something happens in future which results in civil war, ethnic cleansing and this becomes reality as an actual state (it would be short lived due to geopolitical factors i.e Russia, Bulgaria, Serbia & Greece that would support Macedonia and doom Albanians). I urge you as a fellow Albanian to please reflect on the ramifications of pursuing the edits you have. Best.Resnjari (talk) 03:35, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Confusing article

The opening is confusing: It states: "The Republic of Ilirida is a proposed state of Macedonia".

What is stated here is that there should be a state called Macedonia. There is in fact a state called the Republic of Macedonia (or FYROM), but from how the text continues, I understand that the article is about a possible secessionist state made by up of ethnic Albanians. But that is not what the beginning of the article says. --Oddeivind (talk) 19:07, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Draft:1992 Macedonian Albanian autonomy referendum

Please consider incorporating material from the above draft submission into this article. Drafts are eligible for deletion after 6 months of inactivity. ~Kvng (talk) 00:23, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Kvng, I took a look at the draft, and I think that I will incorporate much material. The creator of the draft @Braganza: will probably do the same thing. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:44, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Map of Ilirida

Hi, I'm currently creating a map of the republic of Ilirida and the Albanian ethnic minority in Macedonia. If you have sources that I could use for this map, please link them here below. Thanks! N.Hoxha (talk) 13:53, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

If a map is created and added to this page, it will be removed. This page is not for advocating for irredentist ideas. Ilirida is a fringe concept that only had some popularity back in the 1990s when the status of Albanians in Macedonia was unresolved. The Ohrid agreement of 2001 put fantasies like Ilirida to bed and Albanians today for the most part are integrated in the country.Resnjari (talk) 14:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

The map will not advocate for any irredentist idea, it will only have an educational purpose. Which is: giving more information about the borders of this proposed state. I shall recall you that deleting sourced information and documents goes against the policy of Wikipedia and could be considered as vandalism. I encourage you to read Wikipedia's guidelines carefully. N.Hoxha (talk) 19:03, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

This "republic" never had any borders so I'm not sure how you're going to create a map with reliable sources when they simply don't exist. With regard to making a map on the Albanian ethnic minority in Macedonia, unfortunately I think the best data is still the almost 20-year-old 2002 census. We, of course, already have maps based on that data. Hopefully a new census is done soon. --Local hero ^talk 20:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

A map of the proposed state exists and can be found on following article: http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/republic-of-ilirida-declared-in-macedonia The data of the 2002 census is good enough for depicting the Albanian population in the 21th century. N.Hoxha (talk) 22:07, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

I mean if we have RS for the claim by irredentists/separatists.... that would seem fine to me... but only if we present as such, not if we present it as some true and natural region. --Calthinus (talk) 04:47, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Calthinus. If RS exist, a map can be made and added to the article. In that case it would enrich the article. There are maps around depicting other similar concepts such as Megali Idea. I honestly do not understand what the current opinion of Albanians on North Macedonia has to do with the discussion here. Ktrimi991 (talk) 06:58, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

We have to be cautious here, its bad enough the Northern Epirus article presents a irredentist concept as a true and natural region, we don't want this article to become like it as a magnet for (nationalist) editors to sneak in similar "information" and mask it as something reasonable. If a map is really to exist, clarifications will be made in the article, as some editors have stated, so readers do not mistake the map as connoting some "true and natural region".Resnjari (talk) 07:42, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

As I already mentioned, the map will only be used for educational means. I don't see any connection between this topic and the subject of Northern Epirus. We already made it clear that this so-called state is a proposed republic and it will be described as such on the map. I would like to encourage all of you to link sources that could be used for the creation of the map here below. I still need a source or ethnographic map (public domain) depicting the historical Albanian presence in the region in the 20th century. N.Hoxha (talk) 12:04, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Most villages have similar composition as of 100 years ago, give or take here or there. The current demographic map based on the 2002 census is ok, as all sides involved in the political process recognised its results.Resnjari (talk) 12:08, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Indeed the map of the 2002 census is good enough and it will be used for the Albanian minority in he 21th century. But I need sources or references for the Albanian presence in the 20th century, not personal thoughts. N.Hoxha (talk) 13:11, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't get why we need to have a map for the early 20th century, especially for this page. After all there is majority sentiment here not to treat this page as "a true and natural region", but as a political/irredentist concept. As Ilirida is an idea that sprung up in the 1990s, the 2002 map is more than sufficient for here.Resnjari (talk) 13:26, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

This map will try to provide a better understanding of the Republic of Illirida. The Albanian presence in Macedonia could give us more information on why the borders of this proposed state were drawn that way. I agree that the name of Ilirida emerged in the 90's, but the claim of autonomy or self-governance of territories in Macedonia inhabited by Albanians existed for a period long before the 90's. I do understand your concern of irredentists that could jeopardize this thread but I don't think it justifies censorship of historical events. Since the concept of the republic of Illirida happened and is referenced, it has the right to be mentioned. Another possible way of resolving your concerns would be by adding additional borders of other proposed states, claims, or states that existed in the early 20th and mid 20th century. In that case this map could also be used on other articles, 'Nationalism in Macedonia' for example. I personally think it's a good idea and I will consider this last possibility. Thank you Resnjari. N.Hoxha (talk) 14:42, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Imo, arguments by Local hero and Resnjari here against the map are fine but they sound actually like arguments to delete this page. It exists, and is notable. It is already such a magnet. That's turp, but such is the lot of us wiki janitors. The best thing we can do is have infinite time and bring this page to a quality where it can be used as an example by responsible Greek editors in the future to clean up the dumpster fire that is the N Epirus page ("Albanian" editors including non Albanians focused on Albania can't really do this thanks to wikitribalism, sadly). Hoxha, do beware that in the past, the Albanian geographical presence was as a rule less expansive than today; modern ethnographic boundaries are poor proxies. But the map would be about a claim, and in this I agree with you and Ktrimi that it would not only enrich the page, but that it is important for peoples' comprehension of the issue. Ilirida was never homogenously Albanian and many Albanians were outside its borders-- only a map can clearly show that, for example. That is one of many reasons I think it is useful and important.--Calthinus (talk) 15:02, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Clathinus for voicing your opinion. Now that all is settled, I still need the maps for the representation of Albanians in the 20th century (eventually 19th century as well). I propose that we list some ethnographic maps here below and debate, then decide which one I could use.N.Hoxha (talk) 16:21, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Macedonia_-_Point_of_View_of_the_Serbs.jpg
• https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/Carte_ethnographique_de_l%27Albanie_-_1913.jpg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Macedonia_-_Point_of_View_of_the_Bulgarians.jpg
• https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/CarlSaxET1877.jpg
• https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Ethnographic_Map_of_the_Balkans_%281912-1918%29_-_Historische_alte_Landkarte_%28Sammlerstück%29_von_1924.jpg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ernst-Ravenstein-Balkans-Ethnic-Map-1880.jpg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Carte_ethnographique_des_Macédo-Roumains_(Koutzo-Valaques).jpg

The map in that Balkan Insight article is the first I've seen for Halili's concept. It seems like it is referring to a federalized Macedonia (Republika e Federale Maqedonise) though, with this Ilirida being an entity within the federal republic, right? --Local hero ^talk 15:19, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, it depicts a federal union of two republics: the Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Ilirida. N.Hoxha (talk) 16:21, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

@N.Hoxha, first off, all the maps you listed there are problematic for usage in making a map of early 20th or 19th century demographics of the Albanian population in Macedonia. Wilkinson's pain staking work Maps and Politics: A Review of the Ethnographic Cartography of Macedonia [5] examined hundreds of them and most either have inaccuracies, were politically motivated or ignorant of realities on the ground. In the case of Albanians, many cartographers downplayed their presence etc and in other cases marked it in the wrong areas and so on. Just on that i cannot support a map based on such sources. Separate to that, why do we even need an early 20th century demographics map at all when the starting point for this article is the 1990s?Resnjari (talk) 18:08, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Indeed ethnographic maps are often biased and inaccurate. Unfortunately they are still valuable sources that we can use to reproduce ethnic presences in these regions, since they were published in the 19th and 20th century. I already answered the last part of your response, check my reply on 14:42. If you have better sources, you are always welcome to link them. N.Hoxha (talk) 19:10, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Do we really need to have population maps on this article, be it from the current or a past century? Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:36, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

As I previously said, I intent to make a map trying to understand concepts such as the Republic of Ilirida (see my reply on 14:42). And since the existence of this proposed republic is based on the Albanian population in Macedonia, I think that it definitely should be portrayed on the map. N.Hoxha (talk) 19:10, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

N.Hoxha the map we should have is not one that depicts "where Albanians live". Because where Albanians live != Ilirida (actually the entity may have an ethnic Mac plurality...). There are non-Albanian parts of Ilirida (many), and (fewer but some) Albanian inhabited territories beyond its borders. This page is about "Ilirida", not "Albanian inhabited parts of Macedonia.--Calthinus (talk) 20:01, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Calthinus Yes I understand this. My idea was to combine multiple nationalist or irredentist claims such as the Republic of Ilirida into one map, in such a way to obtain an educational display of the demographic changes of the Albanian ethnic group in Macedonia and their demands in the region. Such a map could also be used in the article 'Albanians in Macedonia' or even in 'Albanian nationalism in Macedonia'. But creating another map for each of these topics is also an option. I'm now creating the map of the Republic of Ilirida, the discussion can continue on its talk page, once I publish it. N.Hoxha (talk) 21:07, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

N.Hoxha, on early ethnographic maps, if you want to use one the one for the Albs in Macedonia article, the 1903 map [6] based on data by Vasil Kanchov mostly aligns (give or take in a few small areas) to the modern situation and has backing from WP:RS scholarship like Wilkinson and others. Anyway making a map on Ilirida that conflates various past Albanian lines of claim over the years is original research. The Ilirida concept is different from Greater Albania, as its proponents proposed in the 1990s for it to be either a autonomous federative entity with Macedonia or an independent state. Moreover in the map shown by Balkaninight, the pink areas are claimed outright as its core territory, while the yellow are shown as contested areas. It excludes places like Bitola, Prilep and Veles and a border on eastern half of the river Crna which the Greater Albania concept claims. Combining the Great Albania and Ilirida concepts in one map would be original research (WP:OR) and WP:UNDUE.Resnjari (talk) 21:37, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

But see N.Hoxha that kind of map may come off as laying claim to territory etc to certain readers and using demographics to justify or give undue weight to the concept. Wikipedia is not a platform for that kind of thing. Even the map of Ilirida you provided that was on Balkaninsight includes no demographic details. Its purely a political map. I mean what's the purpose of including demographics in a Ilirida map? This article deals with a political/irredentist concept, not a real region.Resnjari (talk) 20:14, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

The map is created! If you want to give your opinions or comment on it, you can do so on its talk page. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Republic_of_Ilirida.png N.Hoxha (talk) 19:19, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

It appears to be in order. N.Hoxha, the only thing is change Diber to Debar.Resnjari (talk) 19:28, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing that, I will correct it another time. N.Hoxha (talk) 20:14, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Who is Resmi Ejupi? I don't see him mentioned in the Balkan Insight article. --Local hero ^talk 22:39, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

He was proclaimed as the prime minister of the Republic of Ilirida and he's the one who approved the map. He's mentioned in the map in 1992. N.Hoxha (talk) 13:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Okay, it just doesn't mention him in the source at all, nothing about who approved it. --Local hero ^talk 19:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

It's mentioned in the legend of the map, but it's written in Albanian. N.Hoxha (talk) 22:54, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for clarifying for me. --Local hero ^talk 23:56, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

An article about an historical idea for modern readers

There is not even a single mention of the country under its current name, in violation of Wikipedia's WP:MOSMAC which states that the current name may be added when referring to that country in historical context: "then Republic of Macedonia" or "now Republic of North Macedonia", etc. Also there is not even a single mention of the country's current names in other sentences which do not refer to that country in a historical context.

I went with updating the article to correct both issues, but FPAS came and blindly reverted everything and now the name North Macedonia is again totally absent from the entire article! Not even a single clarification about the country's current name: [7]

EDIT : At least FPAS saw that the complete absense of the country's current name is abit too gross violation of MOSMAC and went to correct the mistake with new edits. This is a good step in the right direction, however I do believe the image captions too need to be updated as well. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 08:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree, I have therefore changed the caption of the image. N.Hoxha (talk) 14:04, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much, N.Hoxha! --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 20:01, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

"now North Macedonia" is only mentioned once in the lede. Everywhere else, pre Prespa agreement is Republic of Macedonia like the caption on the 2002 census, as per WP:MOSMAC.Resnjari (talk) 20:39, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

The census of 2002 is still being used today to depict minorities in North Macedonia. Meaning it is still used after the Prespa agreement, thus the name of the country should be written as North Macedonia in the caption. N.Hoxha (talk) 21:05, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Of course the numbers are used today, as they are the most recent numbers available, but they are numbers for the 2002 population of the Republic of Macedonia, not for the post-Prespa population of North Macedonia. --T*U (talk) 21:22, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

The fact that this proposed state was seen as part of Greater Albania (in several neighbouring countries and abroad) is very much relevant for the lead. It is not some random trivia. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 01:42, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

First sentence

Says "The Republic of Ilirida (Albanian: Republika e Iliridës) is a proposed state". Should it be "is" or "was"? I am pinging @Resnjari:, @Local hero: and @N.Hoxha: but anyone interested might give their opinion. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:08, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Now that I recalled it, a few days ago @Future Perfect at Sunrise: made the change from "is" to "was", but at the time I reverted. Thoughts? Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:28, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Since it's a past-tense idea, I guess "was" is appropriate. --Local hero ^talk 00:43, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I would write 'is a proposed state' since it's still a proposal and it didn't become anything else. N.Hoxha (talk) 00:45, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

It should be "was", past tense. No Albanian political party in Macedonia advocates for this. The last time Halili gathered up a posy of believers to redeclare this as a thing, all he could muster was a few dozen people in central Skopje. That was mide last decade. The Albanian community moved on from this long ago. The 2001 Ohrid Agreement has integrated Albanians.Resnjari (talk) 09:13, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

The current edit war

N.Hoxha, Ktrimi991: I cannot quite see why you keep reverting this inclusion in the lede. The lede is supposed to summarise main points of the article, so the fact that it is already mentioned in the history section, is really not an argument for not having it in the lede, but actually quite the opposite. You seem to accept the mention of this in the "History" section, so you will need to convince me and other editors (pinging Sadko, Jingiby, Khirurg) why it is not lede-worthy. If we cannot work it out here in the talk page, we need to use the tools available for dispute resolution. Continued edit warring is not an option. --T*U (talk) 11:44, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

You would see the reason if you read the article carefully. The lead rn is a mess. "Ilirida" is/was (see the section above) many things:a concept, a popular term referring to North Macedonia's lands with Alb populations, a proposed state aimed to join Albania, a proposed state aimed to join Kosovo, a proposed state aimed to stay as an independent state on its own, a proposed state within North Macedonia, a proposed autonomous part of North Macedonia, a proposed institution within North Macedonia's legal framework aimed at protecting and advancing Albanians' rights. You see the list of what Ilirida is/was. The lede is messy because it does not clarify that Republic of Ilirida is/was sth more than merely a proposed state. Adding one of its many definitions ("Greater Albania") to the lede, at least before rewording the lede, is POV pushing. Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:59, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Exactly, note that the title of the article is the Republic of Ilirida. The purpose of the republic of Ilirida was not to join Albania but it was supposed to create a federal union with Macedonia. The concept of 'Ilirida' (which is not the same as the republic) may have been described as a part of Greater Albania. If users want absolutely to write this on the lede, then a clear distinction between the republic of Ilirida and the region of Ilirida should be made. N.Hoxha (talk) 12:07, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

The article says that the connection made to "Greater Albania" is also a scare tactic used by some non-Albanian nationalist politicians to gain support. The reverted addition to the lede did not make a multidimensional approach to the connection with "Greater Albania". Even more POV pushing, regardless whether it was intentional or unintentional. Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:20, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I took another look at the article. @N.Hoxha makes a good point. Last time the self-proclaimed President, Nevzat Halili, organized a public meeting on the issue, he described as goal the proclamation of Ilirida as an autonomous region within North Macedonia. Quick to add content to the lede, slow to understand what the article is about. Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:34, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

People engaged with this concept, either wanted to mainly declare an independent republic or have an autonomous entity within Macedonia. Some others wanted to join that entity to Kosovo. No one has presented a source to show that people advocating for Ilirida intended unification with Albania. After all Greater Albania is a concept which advocates for the Albanian border of Albania to be extended. Proponents of Ilirida advocated otherwise. The Greater Albania concept has been associated with this concept by outsiders in the region due to its irredentist and secessionist connotations as being one and the same. Though Ilirida is a product of Albanian nationalism, not all state building concepts by Albanians adhere to the concept of a Greater Albania. Caution needs to be taken not to lump all into one when they are not.Resnjari (talk) 09:25, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Do not exist Greater Albania, only real Albania, this term is deliberately used by surrounding enemies Vestacka Nacija (talk) 22:07, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

This is the exact reason why the idea of Greater Albania should be mentioned in the lead (plus notability and relevance). No amount of intelectualisation will change the relevance of that connection. Ilirida has been connected by neighbours and foreign sources as part of an irredentist movement and that fact should be, in some way, mentioned in the lead. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 00:55, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I am not sure I agree that this is an article only (or even mainly) about a Republic. As has been stated by several editors in the next discussion below, it is more about a concept. In that context, I find that some mention about a connection to the concept of Greater Albania is due. The exact way of doing this will, of course, have to be open for discussion. --T*U (talk) 21:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

There is already a mention of this in the history section. N.Hoxha (talk) 23:13, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I have already answeres this, but I can repeat: The lede is supposed to summarise main points of the article (see MOS:LEAD]], so the fact that it is already mentioned in the history section, is not an argument for not having it in the lede, but actually quite the opposite. You seem to accept the mention of this in the "History" section, so you will need to convince me and other editors why it is not lede-worthy. --T*U (talk) 06:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

And you will need to convince me and others why it is lede-worthy. After all, it is you who wants to change the article. If you say "I have already answered this", I and others too can say the same thing. I agree that is more about a concept, as the Republic of Ilirida has never been a country, or another entity of whatever kind. Never being materialized into an entity is the main reason why there is not a precise definition of Ilirida, be it "Greater Albania" or sth else. There are many definitions, and you are saying we should add the the lead a specific one. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 09:54, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

I have no intention of using the "I already have..." argument for other situations, but in this case I think the comment was relevant. First I explained the summarise part of MOS:LEAD in my edit summary here as a direct answer to N.Hoxha's it is already mentioned in the history section in their edit summary here. Then I explained the same thing in a bit more detail when opening this thread here. So please forgive me for reacting when the exactly same argument was raised again without any attempt at further explanation. Regarding my reasons for thinking it lede-worthy, you have given a clue yourself. The concept of Ilirida is not precisely defined, it can be an idea about a separate state, about an autonomous area, about the dream of Greater Albania... Therefore the lede should reflect this and mention Greater Albania as well as the other ideas.

And just an aside in the end: Searching the Internet for what is left of the Ilirida concept/idea today, it seems that it is the Greater Albania idea that still remains, in Facebook, in Twitter (see tweet 18 February) and in the User page of User:Vestacka Nacija. --T*U (talk) 11:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

You either do not understand or intentionally misrepresent the facts. I repeat once again, because of unrealistic and unjust behavior by the then government, Nation who number more than half a million and more are enrolled in the constitution as a minority, because of this they boycotted the constitution and declaration of independence, the counter-answer is that the Albanians organized a referendum on political and territorial autonomy within the existing state and this is crystal clear, they did not want to do with Albania or Kosovo, stop twisting the facts Vestacka Nacija (talk) 13:42, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Is that why you have the three flags prominently in your user page? --T*U (talk) 14:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

By what right do you mention me to the flags I set up, It is my nation and my people and I proudly place it you have no right to interfere Vestacka Nacija (talk) 16:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

User:T*U If Albania wanted big Albania as you like to call it, it would not have recognized the independence of Macedonia as one of the first countries in the world without any conditions, so your story about big Albania and the ambition of the Albanian people is irrelevant, especially as you mention the pages on facebook and twitter there everyone creates what he wants and what you want you can't forbid anyone as someone has a point of view on a political thing every individual has the right to believe what he or she thinks is right Vestacka Nacija (talk) 18:31, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

About the info box Republic of Ilirida

If the Republic of Ilirida is already named, it is logical that an info box with information is needed Vestacka Nacija (talk) 21:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

No infobox, the article is about a concept, not a real region that achieved reocognition in the Balkans or around the world.Resnjari (talk) 22:10, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

An infobox could perhaps be useful, which box would you use for this article? N.Hoxha (talk) 22:27, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

The republic of krusevo how many hours existed I find it necessary for the info box The then Albanian elite managed to hold a referendum amid so many death threats, the referendum was the answer to all unilateral decisions of the then government So I think it should be presented as it fits Vestacka Nacija (talk) 22:40, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

N.Hoxha a frame similar to that used for the republic of Krusevo state before states after Vestacka Nacija (talk) 22:42, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kru%C5%A1evo_Republic Vestacka Nacija (talk) 22:44, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

As Resnjari states, an infobox would not be appropriate here. Unlike the Kruševo Republic, this topic was just a concept, it never existed. --Local hero ^talk 05:04, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Comparisons with Krusevo do not suffice. In Krusevo, revolutionaries ousted the Ottoman administration and set up their own government. Proponents of Ilirida never actually exercised power beyond making declarations, holding meetings etc at their self declared university and holding a ballot that gained no support in the wider region nor internationally. Even if one says, well Krusevo too did not gain any recognition; to have an infobox and treat Ilirida as a sovereign entity that had existed, at the very least one should show they held power over even one village! They never did. Heck the NLA Albanian insurgents of 2001held a few dozen villages up north and ran them according to their rules, and they never called that administration "Ilirida". Ahmeti when he made statements at the time acknowledged Macedonian sovereignty and always said the aim was greater rights, no autonomy, no Ilirida. The point is it does not fit the bill for an infobox like the one on Krusevo. Adding one would be POV pushing and provocative.Resnjari (talk) 07:08, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Resnjari First of all, you have no right to call Albanian insurgents, the war happened because of the injustices and discontent of the Albanian people, as well as all the unilateral decisions of the then fascist government the Albanian side is responding to wrongdoing and all unilateral decisions that have disparaged the Albanian people, these politicians have managed to organize a referendum on political and territorial autonomy within the country There is nothing wrong with presenting it in the info box it needs that referendum and that proclamation to be presented in the right way as far as i have seen you are particularly annoyed by the republic of ilirida you do not need to mix your feelings with the wikipedia page like it or not like ilrida you need to be constructive Vestacka Nacija (talk) 15:44, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Vestacka Nacija, my comparison of both situations was that with the events of 2001, NLA forces did hold territory and govern it according to their own rules and never declared it independent or autonomous. Whereas Ilirida never beyond a ballot, declarations and a self declared university. It never exercised power or sovereignty, even if unrecognised. The case for a infobox of that type for is flawed at best. Besides that, you say i disparage. Not so. I understand why Ilirida arose as an idea. The 1980s, Albanians experienced much discrimination in Macedonia over alleged claims of "nationalism". Albanian language education was shrunk for dubious reasons, many people were fired from their jobs for being Albanian, people couldn't name their children as they wished as some names were perceived "nationalist" etc. I covered this in the Albanian nationalism in the Republic of Macedonia. So in the 1990s, proponents of Ilirida after the Yugoslav breakup wanted to redress what happened in the 1980s, others wanted a complete break. The rebellion of 2001 and subsequent Ohrid peace agreement resolved the status of Albanians in Macedonia. Both sides compromised. Albanians would not seek to carve out areas of Macedonia and separate them as their own and Macedonians would have to recognise rights in proportion to the size and geographical spread of Albanians in the country. Now sure some in Albanian community disagree with this. However what would be the alternative? Civil war! Sure some think that civil war and population exchanges would achieve Albanian areas becoming detached from the country. The flawed assumption is that Albanians would somehow take the areas from Struga, Kicevo, Debar, Gostivar, Tetovo, half of Skopje and part of Kumanovo as their own. They fail to grasp that Macedonians would equally fight to maintain most of those areas, especially Struga, Kumanovo, Skopje, and Kicevo and possibly even Gostivar, as Macedonians exist in large numbers. Also in that civil war scenario, whatever pyrrhic "victory" Albanians would initially achieve by taking certain areas they want; they would lose them long term, not to mention the resulting large population displacements and ethnic cleansing. This is because of the wider geopolitical situation. If Kosovo and Albania become involved, other countries who they have issues with will attack them. If they don't become involved, other countries will still become involved by sending Macedonia indirect aid. Serbia and Bulgaria will send money and arms, and yes Greece too, all backed by a resurgent Russia. Balkan Muslims have lived in a precarious situation since the Orlov revolt. They have only managed to hold on in some places because strong Western powers saw it in their interests to sometimes check local pro-Russian interests, like the Italians and Austro-Hungarians with Albania and the Americans and British in Bosnia and Kosovo. This is rare and in no way guaranteed that would be the future state of affairs, especially now conservative/right wing governments are on the rise in the West who particularly are not interested in issues where Muslims globally experience extreme discrimination and violence, due to the post 9/11 situation. So to bring it back to Ilirida, any Albanian attempt to divide Macedonia would result in a serious and probably terminal regional blow to Albanian interests. Albanians achieved more by participating in the civic and political system of Macedonia then going down the secessionist lane. Ilirida was a concept of the past, and there it should remain.Resnjari (talk) 19:59, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, this is a page, you wrote a script for a movie about Albanians and about ILIRIDA you wrote how it looks like if you put an info box it will be realized, I can't believe what kind of phobias you have, incredible but true Vestacka Nacija (talk) 23:01, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Ah, this coming from someone whose username is Veštačka Nacija (Вештачка Нација), "Artificial Nation" and has a flag of Ilirida on their userpage. You think it’s not lost on anyone who can speak and understand Macedonian that your username is trolling Macedonians about their existence as a nation. Your insistence on an infobox for here is frankly POV pushing at best and WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and WP:NATIONALIST at worst. My comment was said because those few fringe types who advocate for Ilirida are in Tetovo or other places with an Albanian majority and don't place into perspective the reality. I have grandparents and other family on the Macedonian border with Greece. Ilirida will bring war and most likely their demise. The Balkans has had enough of war. As English Wikipedia is widely read, i am not in favour of making this page some advocacy hub for a concept which for the most part been consigned to the dustbin of history.Resnjari (talk) 23:24, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a forum Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 00:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

True, and neither is it a place to advocate for nationalist ideas.Resnjari (talk) 02:49, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure how an infobox could advocate for nationalistic ideas, this is only your point of view. I think you should be more relaxed and have a more civil approach to this conversation, don't forget that Vestacka is also a newcomer therefore you shouldn't be that aggressive towards him WP:BITE. And every user has the right to put whatever he/she wants on his/her personal user page, as-long as it doesn't violate Wikipedia's guidelines. N.Hoxha (talk) 13:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Anyone with the name "Vestacka Nacija" i.e "Artificial Nation", kind of already have shown they are here not in good faith. I doubt they mean it toward Albanians or the Ilirida concept or any other ethnic group or nation, apart from Macedonians, as the username is in Macedonian. The editor already referred to the Macedonian government as "fascist" in previous comments. Macedonians are the main recipients of that kind of slur "Artificial Nation" in the Balkans these days. Newcomers who seek to make contributions don't use a username to troll at the very least. I know the name is not enough to get it changed as others will argue it may innocently' have other conntations, but if the editor POV pushes nationalist type edits and edit wars over them, then it won’t be hard after to determine why they are here. Stuff like that is sanctionable, especially under WP:ARBMAC.Resnjari (talk) 19:12, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

friends You mix terms. relax tense you are attacking me for no reason. an infbox cannot start a war or form a state, you are scared of something for no reason, or intentionally trying to portray this site as something extreme. you know full well that the ilirida is the result of discontent and injustice towards the Albanian people and all unilateral decisions from the then government, the referendum and the proclamation of the ilirida is a counter-response to all unilateral decisions of the then government. you know that Albanians did not vote for independence in parliament. that is why i think this site should be presented properly and similar sites have all infobox so please be honest and realistic about this site and please do not confuse the past with the present regarding this site Vestacka Nacija (talk) 17:05, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

you know full well that the ilirida is the result of discontent and injustice towards the Albanian people and all unilateral decisions from the then government. When i gave you an explanation, you called it "phobias", as i said to you before i understand why it was so in the 1990s, but not today. And even then it never went beyond a ballot, declarations etc. It was never sovereign. @Vestacka Nacija your confirming my suspicions on what angle you want this article to take. This in an encyclopedia, not a place to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS.Resnjari (talk) 19:12, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

If there is a page with a first and last name, then it should be complete as it fits into one page on wikipedia. Organizing a referendum and proclaiming a republic is a big deal and it is very important that it is complete with all the information and infobox, and plus to know that it was organized during a very dangerous time and under great threats and great pressure on the Albanian elite, they did what was whether in their power and the people also responded en masse to that referendum and proclamation. Vestacka Nacija (talk) 19:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

We can not have an infobox about a "Republic" that never have been more than a proposal. There is simply not any info to fit into a box. --T*U (talk) 21:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

As there is not enough information, you have all the dates also has similar info box pages here it is obvious that someone is bothering this site and insisting that there is no info box, this site was even moved to Nevzat Halili redirect which was a real indicator that some wikipedia users are nationally minded There are similar sites a lot Liberland Kruševo republic Republic of vevcani Autonomous Republic of Northern Epirus You need to have the same criteria Vestacka Nacija (talk) 21:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Actually Vestacka makes a good point: Liberland was never recognized by any other country and the proponents of that republic also didn't have any real control over the area. But the article still represents it within an infobox. I personally think that there are no negative sides in using an infobox, I think it gives a compact and aesthetically pleasing representation of the information. I am also in favor of adding an infobox. N.Hoxha (talk) 22:31, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks N.Hoxha for sharing the same opinion That's why I wrote about the info box, if other sites have it, and because of the aesthetic display Vestacka Nacija (talk) 22:53, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

• What infobox do you want to use? Infobox "Country" or "Former country" while the Republic of Ilirida has never been a country? Ktrimi991 (talk) 10:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

The case of Liberland falls into WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Instead of adding an infobox here, you should remove the one on Liberland. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 10:25, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

He can do both, better former states where autonomy is written

there are many similar ones

there are many similar ones

there are many similar ones

Drač County (Kingdom of Serbia) Republic of Mirdita Republic of Central Albania Autonomous Albanian Republic of Korçë there are many similar ones Vestacka Nacija (talk) 13:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

The difference being that all these four actually existed for at least a few months. Also: Please see WP:OTHERCONTENT. --T*U (talk) 14:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

And how much Liberland existed so it has an info box and no one has a problem with it The Albanians organized themselves and responded to the injustice served at the time People were going out in large numbers and even coming from the diaspora to vote for that autonomy Vestacka Nacija (talk) 16:59, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

Info box Vestacka Nacija (talk) 16:50, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

@Vestacka Nacija: I have commented out the terribly misplaced template you put in the heading. I assume that you are trying to initiate some kind of dispute resolution, but you obviously have not read WP:DISPUTE or not understood how this works. My suggestion is to make a "Request for comments", see WP:RfC, about the inclusion of an infobox. That may draw the attention of a larger number of editors, thereby making the ensuing consensus robust. If you like, I could help setting up the RfC. --T*U (talk) 14:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Do whatever you want i have smarter business than wikipedia Vestacka Nacija (talk) 14:26, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

RfC about infobox

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

There is a clear consensus against having an infobox.

I am certainly involved, but technically I was the one posting this RfC, so I think it is within the rules of WP:RFCCLOSE for me to close this discussion (or technically, withdraw the question).

The editor I created the RfC on behalf of, is now indeffed, and they did not even give their !vote in the RfC, so there is an unanimous "Oppose" to include {{Infobox country}} in this article. T*U (talk) 15:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

---

Should the article contain an {{Infobox country}} along the lines of this example? --T*U (talk) 22:03, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Background

I have agreed to help Vestacka Nacija create a RfC in order to get input from more editors and avoid edit war. --T*U (talk) 22:03, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@T*U: Here's a colleague understood, nothing is complicated, Just replace one sentence Vestacka Nacija (talk) 20:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Here the T*U understood what I wrote Just replace one sentence Vestacka Nacija (talk) 20:17, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Survey

• Oppose. We can not have an "Infobox country" or "Infobox former country" about a "Republic" that never have been more than a proposal. Moreover, the original proposal was not even about a country, but about regional autonomy. There is simply not any reliably sourced real info to fit into an infobox. --T*U (talk) 22:03, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose It is a pity Wiki editors waste time with such disputes. The infobox is used for countries or former countries, not for a proposal that continuously changes from independence to federalization to autonomy to more legal rights. The usage of the infobox could even make someone reading the article think that the Republic of Ilirida has a widely accepted territorial size, population size or even currency. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:38, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose, per both the above statements. Not much else to add really. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose, per above and what I've stated previously in this talkpage. --Local hero ^talk 17:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose in addition to the policy-in-practice arguments above, common sense suggests such an infobox will be a recipe for future edit warring. It's better if people focus on expanding the encyclopedia as many topics in this area are woefully under-covered. --Calthinus (talk) 19:59, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose In consideration with the above statements. Idealigic (talk) 21:58, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. No such country ever existed. Even pro-form. Jingiby (talk) 14:22, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Short discription

(Proposed autonomy within the state of north macedonia) This is how it should be written The referendum organized for political and territorial autonomy, There is no mention of the division of the state Stop confusing people Vestacka Nacija (talk) 18:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have no idea what you are trying to say. I hate to say it, but your English is too poor to collaborate meaningfully with other editors here. Please consider not editing on politically difficult topics on the English Wikipedia, as long as you can't discuss such matters properly in understandable English. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:47, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I have also repeatedly had problems understanding the communication of this editor, and I think WP:CIR is relevant. In this case, I think the editor means that the short description added in this edit should mention "autonomy" instead of "secessionist state". Actually I believe they are right, so I will change the short description accordingly. --T*U (talk) 19:24, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Hmm, but does that make sense? The "Republic of Ilirida" isn't "autonomy". That's a logical mismatch of semantic levels. You could say it was a "proposed autonomous state", maybe. But was the thing that was proclaimed in 1992 really intended to be just autonomous within Macedonia, or a separate state? The article is quite equivocal about that. At a minimum, we would expect reliable sources to actually quote what that declaration actually demanded. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:02, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, you are right; and I seem to be opposing my own arguments further up in the page... I am actually quite confused about the whole article. As someone said above, it seems to be mostly about an idea. The lede sentence says it is "a proposed state in the territory of ...", which could be interpreted both as a (seccesionist) national state or some sort of sub-national entity with wide autonomy inside North Macedonia. Perhaps we could make the short-description just as vague: "Proposed state in the territory of North Macedonia"? --T*U (talk) 21:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps the article could better be "Ilirida" and not "Republic of-", since it seems unclear whether the proponents of the idea wanted an independent republic or... one of many other things. --Calthinus (talk) 21:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• "Ilirida" is/was many things:a concept, a popular term referring to North Macedonia's lands with Alb populations, a proposed state aimed to join Albania, a proposed state aimed to join Kosovo, a proposed state aimed to stay as an independent state on its own, a proposed state within North Macedonia, a proposed autonomous part of North Macedonia, a proposed institution within North Macedonia's legal framework aimed at protecting and advancing Albanians' rights. You see the list of what Ilirida is/was. The lede is messy because it does not clarify that Republic of Ilirida is/was sth more than merely a proposed state. Last time the self-proclaimed President, Nevzat Halili, organized a public meeting on the issue, he described as goal the proclamation of Ilirida as an autonomous region within North Macedonia. Changing the name to just "Ilirida", changing the lede, and adding some content to the rest of the article, could probably be of help. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:46, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

[[User:|Calthinus|Calthinus]] You didn't understand well A referendum on political and territorial autonomy within the country was organized, the referendum is a counter-response to the wrongdoing by the then government and the adopted constitution, where we are represented as a minority Albanian not really a minority Vestacka Nacija (talk) 22:37, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Ktrimi You can't call her an ilrida, they declared a republic and it's documented You didn't declare it, you have to respect it Vestacka Nacija (talk) 22:57, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

ILIRIDA is one, ILLYRIA is another users who are familiar with the ILIRIDA should discuss this, not laymen who have no idea? VMRO-DPMNE (talk) 22:48, 16 March 2020 (UTC)Stricken per WP:SOCKSTRIKE --Calthinus (talk) 00:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

University of Tetov@

The page has In 1994, the establishment of the University of Tetova as an independent Albanian educational institution served as a trial run for the functionality of Ilirida as a (underground) state entity. The goal of its proponents was to set up and proclaim ministries for health, culture, education and to adopt some kind of constitution.[11]

The cited source has only this page for results on the University of Tetovo (wiht an o, no results for "-a"): [[8]].

Unless I misunderstand this, that the university is itself an irredentist "experiment" is quite an extraordinary claim.--Calthinus (talk) 21:37, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, @Calthinus:. Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 15 March 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. No consensus for merging though that can take place in a subsequent discussion. — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:41, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

---

Republic of Ilirida → Ilirida – Nobody seems to be clear on what the end goal of this vague idea was -- Albanians in Macedonia needed a name for the collective areas they inhabited that did not involve "Macedonia", but it was not clear if they wanted simply more rights in Macedonia, a federation state with Ilirida and rump North (Northeast??) Macedonia, an independent republic, an independent parliamentary monarchy with Prince Leka as monarch, merger with Albania, or merger with Kosovo. Hence it would seem simple "Ilirida" would be the best designation for the topic. Calthinus (talk) 21:57, 15 March 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. Jerm (talk) 15:00, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Pings to active users who have recently made contributions to this talk page: @Ktrimi991, TU-nor, Future Perfect at Sunrise, Vestacka Nacija, N.Hoxha, Sadko, Resnjari, Local hero, and SilentResident: --Calthinus (talk) 22:02, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• Support It might be better to have this article named just "Ilirida", since the subject's definition is broader than a proposed republic, be it within North Macedonia or not. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
• Support. I agree this makes more sense. Or Merge per below rationale. --Local hero ^talk 01:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
• Comment: If this article is to be about the whole spectrum of ideas ranging from independence to autonomy etc., maybe a renaming to a more abstract descriptive title, like "Albanian separatism in Macedonia", would be more appropriate? Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@Future Perfect at Sunrise:, renaming the "Albanian separatism in Macedonia" would not suffice as the proponents of the concept itself were divided between those that wanted to completely breakway and create something new and those who just wanted autonomy. The second instance does not qualify as separatism. Plus it opens another shitstorm in the world of Wikipedia Balkan topics. It’s best if this article is merged into the Albanian nationalism in Macedonia article. There is room to accommodate nearly all of the content from here into there and hits so many birds with one stone. Best.Resnjari (talk) 14:20, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

• Comment: Such article already exists and is called Albanian nationalism (North Macedonia). Maybe it would be better to move the current article to Albanian nationalism (North Macedonia) as a separate section. Jingiby (talk) 07:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
• Merge to Albanian nationalism (North Macedonia). If no consensus for merging, I support renaming. --T*U (talk) 07:48, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
• Ilirida is a topic that has lots of content to write about, so a merger would not bring any benefit. There are several topics of Albanian nationalism in North Macedonia that have their own articles. Why this one should not do the same thing? Ktrimi991 (talk) 08:07, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

The Albanian nationalism article is not very large, and neither is this one, so per WP:CFORK and WP:SPLIT there does not seem to be any need for a separate article about Ilirida (or any other Albanian nationalism in NM topic). If the topic later is expanded, a split could be discussed then. No need to have a separate article just because there might be an expansion later. --T*U (talk) 10:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

That is not how things work. The merger guideline says: "Merging should be avoided if: 2.The separate topics could be expanded into longer standalone (but cross-linked) articles". If we followed the rationale you are making, half of Wiki articles would be merged. Ktrimi991 (talk) 10:56, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I am not sure the "separate topics" argument is valid here, since these are not separate: one topic is clearly a subset of the other. Anyway, I am quite happy with a separate Ilirida article, but prefer merger. --T*U (talk) 11:11, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Every topic is a subtopic of another topic. But some have enough material to sustain articles of their own and others do not. Hence some topics have their own articles and others do not. For example, Albanians in North Macedonia is a subtopic of Albanians but we will not merge the Albanians in North Macedonia article into the Albanians one. I hope you see my point. Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:20, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Sure, I see your point. I just disagree. Do you see my point? (Actually you do not have to answer that, it is of little importance. As I said, I am happy any way the ball bounces.) Cheers! --T*U (talk) 11:28, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

That is the most interesting side of Wiki. Editors have different opinions and share them with each other. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Agree with Ktrimi -- Albanian nationalism in North Macedonia (which does not itself imply separatism -- see also Black nationalism) is small now but it is a complex and separate topic from this, much as there are separate pages for nationalism and separatism in other such cases. A move to Albanian separatism in North Macedonia as suggested by Fut Perf is more interesting, but there might be pitfall there in that it would seem to endorse the POV (generally by the proponents of the Republic) that such a state would be self sufficient and not a slide to irredentism or federal Macedonia.--Calthinus (talk) 15:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

• Merge to Albanian nationalism (North Macedonia). Since this is merely an unrealized proposal in the context of Albanian nationalism, it doesn't make much sense to me to have it separate. Also if there is no consensus for merging, then I Oppose renaming the article into Illyrida, since the proposal was about the formation of a Republic of Illyrida (Republika e Iliridës), nothing else. Had been more than just proposal about a republic (i.e. also a geographical term), then I wouldn't mind a move to "Illyrida". Support the move as the editors here explained to me that the term is meant to be used in a geopolitical context only. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 15:00, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Move to Ilirida would describe it as geopolitical, not geographic, which I would absolutely oppose. There is nothing geographic whatsoever about lands assigned to Ilirida.--Calthinus (talk) 15:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

She probably does not understand what we are discussing. She seems to think that the proposed name is "Illyrida".... Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, I've probably made that mistake too, to be honest. After all it is "Illyr"ia + "Da"rdania.--Calthinus (talk) 18:05, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

My apologies too. Illyrida, I mean Illirida. It is a common mistake. But still... if you say it is geopolitical and not geographical, then I will consent. Changing my Oppose to Support. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 19:31, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

::::: ❖ SilentResident ❖ ILIRIDA is one, ILLYRIA is another users who are familiar with the ILIRIDA should discuss this, not laymen who have no idea? VMRO-DPMNE —Preceding undated comment added 22:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC) Stricken per WP:SOCKSTRIKE --Calthinus (talk) 00:24, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose Merge The topic is notable in and of itself. I am indifferent to shortening the title. ~ HAL333 15:20, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
• Merge to Albanian nationalism (North Macedonia): It appears to be a case of wp:POVFORK.Alexikoua (talk) 23:10, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
• Merge to Albanian nationalism (North Macedonia) per the above. BD2412 T 16:16, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
• Support move and Oppose proposal to merge The topic is broader than the idea of an independent republic. Fa alk (talk) 18:39, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
• Merge to Albanian nationalism (North Macedonia) per the above. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 12:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
• Support renaming, in accordance with what was said by Calthinus. Oppose merge, the subject has enough content to have its own article. N.Hoxha (talk) 00:54, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
• Support as per reasons outlined by @Calthinus; oppose merge: the topic has enough material for a standalone article. – Βατο (talk) 17:14, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
• The concept of Ilirida is referenced beyond the scope of an article about the Albanian self-determination movement in N. Macedonia. It involves regional politics in the 1990s and the reaction of neighbouring states to the concept serves as a background to discuss diplomacy in the Balkans. Support move and oppose merge.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:54, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
• Support Merge into Albanian nationalism (Republic of Macedonia). True, there is enough material for it to be a standalone article, however in that scope it has a major shortcoming. Sources do not discuss the social and political circumstances of the 1980s (discrimination, near oblivion of Albanian education, mass layoffs due to dubious claims of "nationalism" etc) in the context of the emergence and advocacy of Ilirida in the 1990s. Placing a background section will be difficult as some editors will say its original research as sources do not mention Ilirida or the 1980s in the same breath. Without such a section, a reader will assume that this Ilirida concept was the result of a group of radical Albanian nationalists whipping up part of the Albanian population and making them held bent on destroying Macedonia. This is a complete distortion of why Ilirda emerged and was advocated for, especially at a time of great uncertainty among the Macedonian Albanian community following the collapse of Yugoslavia and the severe curtailing of Albanian socio-linguistic rights in 1980s Macedonia that inspired Milosevic in 1990s, who took it to another level in Kosovo. I ask some fellow editors to reconsider their vote, and change it to a merger into Albanian nationalism (Republic of Macedonia) as most article content would go there and importantly have the context of the 1980s as well. It would also make sense to merge as this Ilirida concept is not supported neither by the contemporary Albanian political establishment of Macedonia or by the overall Albanian population of Macedonia (a gathering of 30 people by Halili a few years ago or some soccer hooligans yelling Ilirda sometimes at football matches does not count as mass support). In that scenario, i support retention of Republic of Ilirida and Ilirida as two redirect pages. If a merger does not happen, i support the renaming of the article.Resnjari (talk) 14:12, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

An article is merged if its topc is not sufficiently independent from another one. You accepted that "True, there is enough material for it to be a standalone article". Your concern that this article can not have a proper background section is redundant. There are several RS that discuss the Ilirida thing in the context of anti-Albanian policies by Macedonian-dominated governments and Albanian demands for social and economic justice, and you have used some of those RS on other articles. Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:26, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

@Ktrimi991:, as i had many concerns with this article, i made multiple additions and adjustments to address them. As long as those stay, i am ok with its renaming and its continued existence. I also support the rentention of the "Republic of Ilirida" as a redirect page. Best.Resnjari (talk) 18:48, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Good job @Resnjari:. I might make some content additions too but always depending on other factors such as time avaiable etc. Ktrimi991 (talk) 19:01, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Cool, whenever you can. Best. :)Resnjari (talk) 19:10, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Illurida wiki" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Illurida wiki. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC678 02:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)