Talk:Vurg

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

Obviously 'Vurg' isn't a village but a region, specifically a plain with some dozen of villages inside (it's known as Vurgu or Vurgut [[1]] [[2]]). To be more specific its a plain between Saranda, Konispol, Delvina, Dropull.Alexikoua (talk) 19:32, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vurgu is in its defined Albanian form. Albanian defines proper names. Per Std. Albanian, it's Vurg. AFAIK it is a plain/lowland actually. Improved the reference. --Sulmues (talk) 19:37, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Btw Alexikoua Vurgut isn't an alternative name, it means of Vurgu in Albanian.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:42, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Vurgut is the Dativ form in Albanian. Of Vurg=I/e Vurgut is actually the Genitive form. --Sulmues (talk) 19:42, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The question was 'What is X?' not 'how its spelled'.Alexikoua (talk) 20:03, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology[edit]

It appears that there is additional history about the etymology of the name (quote from D. Kyriazis, 2001):

:βούρκος ο, νε. μεσν. βούρκος το 'λάσπη, βόρβορος, βούρκος' < αρχ. *βρυξ αιτ. βρύχα ( (ΙΑ 4.81, Κρ.4.177, λ. βρίξ) ενώ Ανδρ.57 αγν.
ετύμου. vurk α. Δ 'ελώδες μέρος, χωράφι μέσα σε ελώδη περιοχή' (Τσαμ.) DSH II 110, Mann 567, vurg 'id.' Mann ό.π., 'ελώδες μέρος που χρησιμοπ. για χειμαδιά' Fjalor 621, Ί.έλος 2.κατακάθι, ό,τι 328 απομένει από τις ελιές αφού αφαιρεθεί το ελαιόλαδο' (πβ. και vrug) FGJSSH 2191. -Τόπων. Vurg στην περιοχή Δελβίνου, Vurk, Vurku ί Agait, Vurqet, Vurgjet, Vurkopulla FOE 128, 38, 68, 453, 141, 141 αντιστ.Alexikoua (talk) 03:03, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Albanian term "vurg", which means 'marsh, swamp', comes from Proto-Albanian *wurga according to Orel (1998) p. 517. – Βατο (talk) 10:44, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Full etymology: (source above) The medieval Greek term "vourkos", means 'mud, muck, puddle' comes from the ancient Greek vryx. It is a Greek loanword in the Albanian language. Alexikoua (talk) 02:38, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As already stated, Orel derives Albanian "vurg" from Proto-Albanian *wurga (Orel 1998 p. 517). Provide the full translation of Kyriazis' quote, please. – Βατο (talk) 08:31, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Orel is the most known researcher on the origin of Albanian vocabulary, and is commonly cited by other top quality researchers of the history of the Albanian language and Proto-Albanian (B. Demiraj, Matzinger, de Vaan etc). Kyriazis on the other hand does not even understand Albanians properly. He cites Eqerem Vlora and Eqerem Cabej and misrepresents their words. Kyriazia has his merits but is far away from challenging Orel etc. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:21, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Linguistic propositions can be very speculative and sometimes may go against a consensus. Ktrimi991 and Bato examined vurg < *wurga. Two other comments:
    • 1)A derivation vurg < vourkos from medieval Greek is impossible since /vurkos/ would simply produce /vurk/ but not /vurg/ and /vurqe/ instead of /vurgje/
    • 2) [This is actually the central argument which makes the proposition untenable]: Kyriazis propose that modern Greek vourkos comes from ancient Greek vryx. Semantically, this word means "from the deep [sea]" and such a semantic shift is impossible in Balkan Yamnaya languages both of which have a rich vocabulary which is related to marshlands. Greek wouldn't need to produce a semantic shift - which isn't attested anywhere - from *bryx because it already has ... elos in an abundance of ancient and medieval toponyms. Secondly, ancient Greek *bryx in the most typical ancient-to-koine development of Greek shifted long u to /i/ (hence ancient Dyrrhachion is /Dirachion/ in medieval/modern Greek). From this development Greek has the word vrychithmós. A derivation of vourkos from *bryx would have to explain why just in this single case long u remained /u/ and /vru/- was metathesized to /vur/-.
      • This is why vourkos < *bryx is an impossible derivation.

--Maleschreiber (talk) 23:04, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no way for us to judge top graded linguists in such an aggressive way. If there is really a problem about Kyriazis work then there is RSN. The fact that Vourkos comes from ancient Greek Vryx [[3]] is attested by ALL mainstream works dedicated to Greek language. We should be carefully when propagating this kind of wp:FRINGE.Alexikoua (talk) 23:35, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kyriazis says that Vurg is an Albanian toponym. His only mistake is that he thinks the Albanian word "vurg" comes from a Greek loanword. K does not become g in Albanian. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:38, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I didn't judge the author, I explained why the proposition is untenable and not in line with the development of Greek language itself. --Maleschreiber (talk) 23:42, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you mean his 'mistake' based on a pro-Albanian POV. There is no way we judge bibliography based on that. If you are partially refuting a work you need to go to RSN for input. Kyriazis also mentions among the various forms: Vurk, Vurku. He can't be wrong.Alexikoua (talk) 23:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If he was right, then the -vrych- component in Greek would be -vurk-, but it's not. It's vrychithmos, not vurkithmos. --Maleschreiber (talk) 00:38, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Even of we accepted that Kyriazis was right, the Greek origin thing is redundant in this article. Kyriazis says that the Vurg toponym is an Albanian word. Whether that Albanian word comes from Proto-Albanian or Greek is not sth to be elaborated in this short article of a small plain. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:54, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not exactly, Kyriazis states that Vurg, Vurk, Vurkopulla variants of the Cham Albanian dialect are Greek loans and Vurg being used in Albanian doesn't exclude a possible Greek origin of the toponym. What's striking is that the toponym Vourkos is in use in several regions throughout Greece (Lesvos, Aetolia, Chalkis) but for Albania it offers zero results apart from this region. Kyriazis is very detailed on the linguistic connection, while reconstructed languages (such as Proto-Albanian) can only be treated in a theoretical spectrum exclusively.Alexikoua (talk) 01:10, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kyriazis says that "vurg" is a Greek loan in Albanian and that word is found in several toponyms in Albania, i.e. Kyriazis says that the Albanian word "vurg" is of Greek origin. Orel says that that Albanian word is of Proto-Albanian origin. Now, if you think that this article is the place to discuss where did Albanian take that word from, open an RfC. If others give you right, add it. I am just not convinced by your rationale. All sources present say that the toponym means "marshland, swamp" in Albanian. Where Albanian took it from is where the disagreement arises. Btw, Laç and Lurë have similar meanings in Albanian, but as toponyms they are found only in one area each. That does not mean Albanian took those words from another language. Ktrimi991 (talk) 01:52, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that this article is the relevant place to discuss where the Albanian term "vurg" ultimately comes from. The toponym Vurg is an Albanian form that means "marshland, swamp", used to describe this region. As already stated by other editors, the derivation of Albanian vurg from medieval Greek vourkos is inconsistent with the phonetic system of Albanian. Also it is noteworthy that this Albanian toponym is not Vurk with the voiceless velar plosive, but Vurg with the voiced velar plosive. Furthermore, even accepting a highly unlikely derivation of vurg from medieval Greek, the modern Greek form Vourg-os is in any case a loanword from Albanian. – Βατο (talk) 10:04, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Demiraj 2008 reads: Vurg, appelé ainsi par le mot du grec moderne vurkos "pays bas, marais". I have real doubts on the argument against the vurk(os)-> vourgos link. Perhaps Demiraj is wrong on that but he isn't the only one being clear on this.Alexikoua (talk) 04:25, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I was notified about this discussion by Alexikoua; however, i do monitor the article anyway. Alexikoua, to answer your question, Liço (2009, pp. 454–455) wrote the following about the toponym:

Në Fjalorin e Gjuhës Shqipe jepen dy kuptime: 1. vurg – kënetë, vendi i ulët dhe me baltë dhe 2. lëng i trashë dhe i zi që mbetet pasi shtypen ullinjtë. Këto dy kuptime nuk kanë lidhje midis tyre, por duke qenë se fjalori nuk është etimologjik nuk jep prejardhjen e fjalës vurg. Fjala vurg vjen nga fjala e greqishtes vurkos. Në këtë familje fjalësh kemi, vurkos, vurkaris-ara-ariko, vurkotopi, vurkotopos, vurkoma, vurkono. Kështu banori i Vurgut greqisht quhet vurkaris-ara-ariko. Me shqipërimin e tij quhet vurgar.

For what it's worth, back in December, and out of personal interest for the topic, i exchanged a number of messages with Michiel de Vaan, and i also asked him to share his opinion on the aforementioned etymology of vurg by Orel (1998). He shared the following:

Orel's reconstructions must always be taken with a pinch of salt, and here in particular he gives no evidence whatsoever that the word must go back to PAlb. or PIE, since there are no evident cognates. I cannot now check other etymological dictionaries. But in general, a Greek or a Slavic loanword are quite possible. Note the word 'vrug' for 'dew', which may or may not be cognate with vurg (r-metathesis being typical for Slavic words, for instance). But I have not studied this specific question before.

All that aside, while i have nothing but respect for Orel, and do acknowledge that he is one of the foremost experts in the field, technically speaking, we must be careful in this case, so as to avoid improper editorial synthesis; Orel (1998) doesn't directly discuss the etymology of the toponym in question. On the other hand, i find Ktrimi's argument of redundancy (or better, proportionality), reasonable. So, i don't think we should expand on the etymology, considering how small the article is. However, the relevant sentence should at the very least be rephrased into something more accurate, without affecting its neutrality; vurg doesn't mean anything in Greek, as it is not a Greek word. It could be changed into something like:

The toponym means marshland, in both Albanian and Greek.

Furthermore, βούρκος isn't only found in Modern Greek; it is also attested in Medieval Greek. Linguists are divided on its etymology. Kriaras' Medieval Greek dictionary gives two possible etymologies in the lemma βούρκος; deriving either from Hellenistic Greek βρύξ 'seabed', or from Medieval Latin burca 'sewer'. Both views are also presented in Babiniotis' etymological dictionary.

Something else i found interesting, is that aside of vourkos, vourgos is also attested as a toponym in Greece (e.g. in Crete, Kythira, Euboea, etc.); albeit with a different etymology. Read the lemmata μπούργος and βούργον, from Kriaras' dictionary. Demetrios1993 (talk) 06:32, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I made the change to the article you suggested above. Orel says that Albanian "vurg" comes from Proto-Albanian *wurga, without giving a link to any PIE word. Since in both Albanian and Greek a connection with a PIE word has not apparently been given, I would not rule out the possibility that the two languages took the word from an ancient non-IE langauge. The possible derivation from Medieval Latin burca too is interesting, since marshes are often seen as places of unclean water. Orel ofc is far from perfect, and one can easily find obvious mistakes in his work. But still he is one of the best in his field, as de Vaan too is. On the other hand tbh I do not take Kyriazis and Liço much seriously. Not only they have a good number of mistakes in their works concerning Albanian, but at least in the case of Kyriazis nationalistic bias is obvious. In any case, it is impossible to tell who named the Vurg region, Albanians or Greeks. And really it is a detail that does not have much importance apart from the curiosity in the context of linguistics. Ktrimi991 (talk) 10:57, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that the word "vurg" in Albanian also means "lëng i trashë dhe i zi që mbetet pasi shtypen ullinjtë" supports the idea that the etymology of the words is related to unclean waters. Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:19, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lefter Talo[edit]

user:Alexikoua and user:Khirurg this article is about the region of Vurg. Not about Lefter Talo which is already mentioned in the corresponding article. No matter how useful the readers might find your information and sources. It does not belong here RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 21:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So are you saying Lefter Talo should not be mentioned at all in the article, even though he is mentioned in a source that refers to Vurg? Khirurg (talk) 22:45, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Informations about Lefter Talo dont belong here. Lefter Talo is one thing mentioned to Vurg and Information about Lefter Talo is another thing. And the source refert to him being born in Vurg it does not refer to Vurg RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 22:53, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why does "informations about Lefter Talo don't belong here"? He was active in the Vurg area, so I don't see why he shouldn't be mentioned. Khirurg (talk) 23:36, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Talo represented the local Greek resistance element that joined the Nationali Liberation Army of Albania. Since we refer to information that's not necessary to this article I can propose one: recruitment to the Chameria battalion was extremely poor in Vurg (only a total of 15 men joined). It makes someone wonder why this battalion was so unpopular in this area. The vast majority of the locals joined different battalions: Ziko, Bocari, Talo (yes the one named after him). Alexikoua (talk) 01:40, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak argument Alexikoua. Didnt expect that from you. How about we leave personal opinions and personal thoughts and use a neutral point of view and documenting black and white the neccesary information without making everything political or linking it with the nationalistic stuff that you always love to link? Lefter Talo village today in 2023 has 120 inhabitants. As a matter of fact Talo's allegiance was clear. This article is about Vurg. You are welcome to document anything you can in a personal individual article. Vurg's article is not your ground for pushing biased opinions. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 03:18, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is this "nationalistic stuff you always love to link"? That's very vague. What are you specifically referring to? It's still not clear what you are objecting to. Khirurg (talk) 03:37, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the recruetment was poor or not amongst albanians of ethnic greek background in the area is not yours to make, if you find sources add them to the respective articles where they belong. As a matter of fact there was not Greek resistance element amongst them, there was National Liberation Movement of Albania there is no need to split them according to ethnic background in 2023, something they didnt do even in 1940s. Still, None of this has anything to do with Vurg so you would be cooperative to self revert and feel invited to edit Lefter Talo's article as much as you can being that you have enough sources and information. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 03:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but your comment makes no sense whatsoever. What are you talking about? What does 2023 have to do with anything? Can you please be specific what you are objecting to? The are sources in the article and they are all quoted faithfully. If you need help with translation of the Greek source, I can help. Khirurg (talk) 04:15, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay let me explain in a way that you can understand. This article Vurg is about Vurg. Information and sources about the namesake behind Lefter Talo do not belong here in Vurg. (The further details about trying to push and link any information with Greece we can discuss in my talk page since neither that belongs here). RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 04:28, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are we clear? user:Khirurg user:Alexikoua RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 11:08, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is "namesake behind Lefter Talo"? What information does not belong? Be specific. All the sources mention Vurg, so of course they should be included. Khirurg (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
user:Khirurg You havent even opened the article of Lefter Talo to see that its about the Village not the individual itself. The information About what Lefter Talo did or was does not Belong to the History of Vurg but to the biography of the person itself. I see by your questions that you are having difficulties comprehending basic points that i am making. user:Alexikoua have we reached a consensus? RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 18:36, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The sources mention both Vurg and Talo. I see no valid reason for removal. Khirurg (talk) 14:35, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The only mention of Vurg is the fact that Talo was born in Vurg. The source is for the deeds on Talo nothing else about Vurg. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 15:36, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A third opinion would be a good way of solving this. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 16:04, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read the source? It says Talo was a protagonist in communist activities in Vurg. Khirurg (talk) 20:07, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Its still about Talo not about Vurg RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 00:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Don't view this as the third opinion, but I have to agree with @RoyalHeritageAlb. AlexBachmann (talk) 17:30, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My summary for this case:
I wanted to bring up a concern regarding the content in this Wikipedia article about the region where this notable person was born. I noticed that some editors have added information about the person's personal information & achievements and deeds to this article. However, I believe that this information should be included in the person's own personal article, rather than in the article about the region.
While it is important to acknowledge the person's connection to the region, it is not necessary to include every detail of their personal life in the article. Doing so could detract from the main focus of the article, which is the region itself. Additionally, the personal achievements and deeds of the person are more appropriate for their own personal article, where they can be more thoroughly and accurately discussed. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 21:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, you just don't want his ethnicity mentioned [4]. That's what this is really about. Just say it openly and spare us the rest. Khirurg (talk) 21:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The rules do not bend according to how we please. I would have done the same even if he had another background. Maybe the one trying to push the word "Greek" everywhere is you. Do it on his respective article. Shall we also mention that he was the son of a communist? Or that he was left handed? How come the ethnicity comes even before the military allegiance (from which he was known for) or before the fact that he was awarded "The Hero of People" the highest Albanian medal one can get. So dont accuse me of thinking this case like you. The article is about Vurg the Region. He can be mentioned. Informations ABOUT him, No. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 21:16, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"The rules" huh? Can you point to where "the rules" say that an individual's ethnicity is not supposed to be mentioned anywhere? Khirurg (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia's guideline is to maintain a neutral point of view and to only include information that is relevant and directly related to the article's subject. This means that any information that is not relevant or directly related to the article's subject should be removed. And Lefter Talo's personal information is not related to the region of Vurg. If a reader wants to know more about Lefter Talo he should search on his respective article not on the article of Vurg. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 22:31, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are you referring to WP:NPOV? Where does WP:NPOV state that an individual's ethnicity should only be mentioned in their respective article and nowhere else? I can't find that anywhere in WP:NPOV. Khirurg (talk) 22:35, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ethnicity is just part of the wide group of "personal informations about the individual" i am not refering to ethnicity ONLY. I am refering ALSO to include your whole edits like [[5]]. Stop trying to make this as something focused on the ethnicity. Ethnicity or not it is personal information which has nothing to do with the purpouse of this article. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 22:48, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So you can't point out to where "the rules" say that an individual's ethnicity should not be mentioned anywhere on wikipedia except their respective article. Good to know. Now, do you realize how much time and effort (and not just your own) you have wasted to keep two words out of the article? It's literally two words, and yet here you are, day after day, wasting hours and hours of everyone's time just to keep those two words out of the article because they bother you so much. Making up "rules" that don't exist, cluttering talkpages, post after post, just for that. You know what's that called? It's called WP:TEND, and it won't end well. Let it go. Khirurg (talk) 23:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that we have different perspectives on this matter. However i repeat, to ensure a fair and unbiased resolution, this is why its the best solution to involve the third party, such as the dispute resolution noticeboard. It doesnt bother me personally and stop making it personal. I remain at what i said that "Personal informations (such as background), achievments and deeds (such as what the person did etc.) belongs to his respective article not to the article about Vurg. Even if it would be literally one single Word. If it doesnt belong there then it should not be there. Thats how we can cooperate to make the best of the article. So since its been hours and hours that you reply only to one sentence of my comments (replying with questions), ignore the whole other text and act like it is difficult to comprehend. Its no point to argue without the dispute resolution involvement. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 00:07, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Another kilobyte of text to remove two words from the article. Khirurg (talk) 05:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About the Third Opinion request: It's been removed since more than two editors have been involved in this discussion. (It was also stale, having been on the list for more than 6 days, though I would've probably given it a couple more days if that had been the only problem due to it having been accidentally removed by others adding listings during that time.) But an opinion is an opinion and AlexBachmann's opinion counts as a 3O even if that was not his intent. Consider DRN or RFC if dispute resolution is still needed. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:49, 19 April 2023 (UTC) (3O Volunteer) This is an informational posting only and I am not watching this page; contact me on my user talk page if you wish to communicate with me about this.[reply]

Wrong interpretion of DRN and removal of historical events on WWII[edit]

This edit [[6]] removes entirely vital information about the region's history (by pretending that this was decided at the relevant noticeboard): 1. Talos supported the cooperation of the local Greek minority with the Albanian National Liberation Movement, 2. Talos being a resistance figure of the local Greek minority. Obviously this information is important as part of the history of the population of Vurg and just a biographical info of Talo. On the other hand if there is a trivial piece of info that should be removed without hesitation this is the very limited participation to the Chameria battalion to just 15 men. Alexikoua (talk) 19:41, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This kind of misinterpretantion needs to stop: This text Talo resistance figure of the local Greek community.[14][15] Talo became the main figure of communist resistance in Vurg and supported the cooperation of the Greek community with the National Liberation Movement of Albania. adds information about the history of Vurg, it isn't just information that concerns the specific individual exclusively. As such this small piece of vital historical information doesn't not describe his career in detail and therefore it's good to stay since it describes resistance participation of the locals in WWII.Alexikoua (talk) 21:07, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think we finally have an agreement on what belongs to the region and not. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 11:55, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

POV issues[edit]

A recently added source [[7]] begins with the history of this region as follows: THE VURG THROUGH HISTORY In antiquity , Vurg was included in Epirus tribe territory of the Chaones . It was there that our ancient ancestors lived . It's obvious that the author is crying loud for something here. Any ideas what makes this part of historical approach wp:RS?Alexikoua (talk) 04:22, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Any ideas what makes it non wp:RS? RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 07:50, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's POV since the author is screaming about the history of "his ancestors" declaring that neutrality isn't his concern.Alexikoua (talk) 20:59, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What do you define as "an ancestor"? RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 23:32, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This cliche is used several times by the specific author; he also claims that the Albanian speech of the Illyrians is the general view of the "new linguists" (p. 49), all Epirotes were Illyrians/or almost-Illyrians (p. 27), etc etc. Obviously when an author specifies that a country belonged to "our ancestors" he refers to his co-ethnics. To sum up that's not the way modern scholarship is written.Alexikoua (talk) 02:01, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So what is your point? That this author cant call someone "ancestor" in Vurg? Not that necessarily refers to his co-ethnics but even if so i think in this article there is enough referenced evidence of the possibility of having an albanian ancestor from here. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 15:40, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In this case Delvina can be used since the claim supported by him does not seem to be controversial. However, in general Delvina is not RS, he has lots of bias and fringe stuff. Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:26, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Author[edit]

This added reference [[8]] it doesnt result that it is a text written by Hammond. It might be a mistake in the authors name of source. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 08:07, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's written by Hammond. I'll make the appropriate corrections in the citation.Alexikoua (talk) 19:02, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Checked it, the citation is correct "Epirus and the Greek World of City-States 750-500 B.C." is written by Hammond.Alexikoua (talk) 19:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vurg&oldid=1205961637"