Jump to content

Talk:Albania: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎CIA FACTBOOK: loged out
Line 159: Line 159:
:::::As I've expected you misused even the one and only source you present, nowhere in CIA is this written, so apart from wp:pov we have also a severe case of wp:synth, claiming that all people that didn't declare their ethnicity are ethnic-Albanians. To sum up a highly controversial census should be treatied with heavy precaution by this community... the more it has no place in any infobox per long established concensus in this talkpage.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 11:36, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
:::::As I've expected you misused even the one and only source you present, nowhere in CIA is this written, so apart from wp:pov we have also a severe case of wp:synth, claiming that all people that didn't declare their ethnicity are ethnic-Albanians. To sum up a highly controversial census should be treatied with heavy precaution by this community... the more it has no place in any infobox per long established concensus in this talkpage.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 11:36, 13 April 2014 (UTC)


::::::Alexikoua, please stop calling it a controversial census, unless you have references from relevant international organizations that dispute it. As you do not have it is a clear case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT![[Special:Contributions/217.24.254.71|217.24.254.71]] ([[User talk:217.24.254.71|talk]]) 11:44, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
::::::Alexikoua, please stop calling it a controversial census, unless you have references from relevant international organizations that dispute it. As you do not have it is a clear case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT![[User:Balkanian`s word|Balkanian`s word]] ([[User talk:Balkanian`s word|talk]]) 12:02, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:02, 13 April 2014

Template:Vital article

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

GDP not correct

As Wikipedia estimates in the "Albanian Economy" page, the GDP of Albania is 25.035 billion $, not 24 as in the "Republic of Albania" page. The GDP per capita, is not adjusted and above all, doesn't reflect the change in population, with the actual resident population 2.83 mln and not 3,1 mln, as in "Wikipedia" actual estimate. You can consult my findings in Albanian Institute of Statistics, www.instat.gov.al. The laters publication of census, also shows an reductions in greek minority, in 0.87% of total population and fall of percetange of muslim religion, in 56%.

Suggestion by klevisgjoni@yahoo.com

Some uncontroversial edits

There are a couple of uncontroversial edits that unfortunately has drowned in the noice created by the recent edit war. Maybe some admin could reintroduce them while the article is closed for ordinary edits.

  • There is a link pointing to "People's Republic" in the third section of the lede, ending up in China. It should point to "People's Socialist Republic of Albania".
  • More China: In the caption to the second picture under "Economy", "Taivani" redirects to Taiwan! The relevant article is "Taivani" with no need for a redirect.
  • In addition there has been a few bot edits and general fixes, among them removing the category "Countries of the Mediterranean Sea", but I suppose the bots will come back end clean up themselves.

Regards! --T*U (talk) 16:25, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article now only semi-protected, so I have done these edits myself. --T*U (talk) 13:59, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About streching of sources

Just for the record, the edit by IP 2.150.43.179 on 30 December was mine. (I did not have access to my account.) I challenge the statement "Today religion plays a role in the lives of only 39% of Albanians, and Albania is ranked the thirteenth least religious country in the world.", as I find it to be much stronger than the source allows. The source is a survey made in 2009-2010 with the question "Is religion an important part of your daily life?". The first part of the sentence is partly covered by the source, but there is a significant differense between "plays a role in the lives" and "an important part of your daily life". Even an atheist like myself understands that religion can "play a role" in ones life without being "an important part" of it. The second part of the sentence is deduced from the fact that Albania is number thirteen from the bottom of the list. However, the list covers only 114 of the world's 190+ countries in the world, and it is easy to find missing countries that in all probability would be close to the bottom of the list. As an example: Close to Denmark and Sweden one would expect to find Finland, Norway and Iceland. Also Netherland should be far down on the list. There is no way that the source supports the number 13 claim. It is also a question if the term "least religious country" is covered by the survey's question, but I guess it may be acceptable. I will rephrase the sentence to fit the source better. Regards! --T*U (talk) 11:34, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV and article

It seems that the Albania article is heavily biased. It is good to try to promote your country by any means, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and promotion via this way is not very clever. I've added in the lead an accurate infromation which is sourced (by BBC) and if required I can sourced it with multiple sources. Everybody knows (a simple ssearch in Google will prove it) that Albania along with Moldova are among the poorest countries in Europe. This is a fact and needs to be shown to get the reader to understand that despite progress, Albania still remains a poor (by western European standards) country. By removing accurate, sourced material, no one promotes Wikipedia reliability and credibility. 77.49.58.129 (talk) 17:34, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Buddy , i dont know in what decade you live , but countries change and economies as well . Albania has a higher gdp than Moldova , Kosova , Bosnia, Ukraine , and is on the same level with Macedonia , Serbia , Montenegro etc.etc. * its AIC and GDP ( ppp ) per capita is around 35 % of the EU average ( source > Eurostat for the year 2013 ) , and it is considered an upper economy ( Worldbank and The IMF source ) . It is preety clear , that you have a huge bias against albania . If you however insist about this , it is your right as an editor , HOWEVER , you will have to write it in the section of economy ... and please do find sources , because the one you have put does not support this !!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malbin210 (talkcontribs) 17:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First of all I am not your buddy. Bu the way you talk, you show the kind of attitute and personality level. I have no bias against anything. I present only well known facts that you know, but you prefer to erase to try to use Wikipedia for your own purposes. This is, forgive me to say, dumb. It creates a big issue in Wikipedia's cretibility.

Albania is still one of the poorest countries in Europe. Here are some sources (other than the BBC):

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/10354017/Tony-Blair-signed-up-to-help-Albania-to-join-EU.html http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.se/start/countries/albania http://globaledge.msu.edu/countries/albania/economy

This information certainly belong at the lead, the same way as you added information regarding HDI and GDP per capita and "upper middle income economy" These information should also go in the economy section, but we all know why you added them there right? Because it suits you. And what doesnt suit you (i.e. the truth) must go. Well this is not gonna happen, because Wikipedia is not the place for countries promotion. 77.49.58.129 (talk) 18:37, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The links that you provided have no credibility according to wikipedia , 1 of the links is an article from 2005 , and another link is from a newspaper article ... ! For these kind of statements you look at insititutions such as IMF , and WORLDBANK , but they do not support your case .
As i said please do make the edits , but they have to be in the apropriate section ( economy ) , and be reasonably sourced . These are NON authority , OLD sources .
Also user is insulting and agressive and has initiated a war edit with more than 4 other users . As such i will ask for an arbitration if this persists . His persistence to write that albania is the poorest country ( which is not ) in the lead paragraph shows a very biased person . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malbin210 (talkcontribs) 18:51, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I didnt say it is the poorest, I said is ONE OF THE POOREST. Which it is. But lets go with the IMF and World Bank:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

Can you please tell me where Albania stands in comparison with the rest of Europe??? I think the whole discussion is hillarious, trying to prove the obvious! If you persist, I will have to get other contributors as well to this one. The only certain is that this article will not be left biased. 77.49.58.129 (talk) 19:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It stands exactly where i told you , as i told you ( even with those 2012 gdp numbers from IMF and The World bank ) . Please do look the latest updated GDP ( PPP ) per capita for 2013 and 2014 , from the Ministry of economics of Albania ( 11.400 $ per capita ) > http://www.financa.gov.al/files/userfiles/Programimi_EkonomikoFiskal/Kuadri_Makroekonomik_dhe_Fiskal/KMF_Periudhen_2014-2016_VKM_NR.73_date_23.01.2013.pdf .

and since you are greek , here it is a greek tv news report showing many greek immigrants in Albania > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tig1BDeE2GQ

But dont worry , Italians as well are emigrating in Albania lately http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llRSxwL1B_g . Please do look these videos to get updated about albania :) .


By doing so , maybe you will understand that no one is promoting albania . Is just the reality today . Albania is changing my dear greek friend !

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Malbin210 (talkcontribs) 19:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply] 
I think the article needs an Administrator fast. Malbin210 obviously has an issue here. It is also trongly suspected that he/she creates sockpuppets (Allenbond) to avoid the 3RR. He/she doesnt try to reach a concensus but only reverts constantly multiple users: WilliamThweatt, anonymous user: 77.49.58.129 and also me.Astarti34 (talk) 21:56, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is funny because i would say exactly the same thing for you Astarti34 , the anonymous user with an ip from greece and the user WilliamThweatt . Accusing people , without a reason is not allowed in wikipedia . As per wikipedia rules you are free to ask for an investigation ! In fact i do kindly ask you to do so . If this vandalism persists i will seek an arbitration . I do kindly ask from any moderator , to see all the reverts , and i am confident that they will conclude that they have been mal intentioned , with a clear nationalistic intention ... you all 3 guys have something in common , you are all greek * all 3 of you * !

Maybe we should both mutually ask for a sockpuppet investigation for each other , i think that would be fair ! And let us see who in reality is abusing with wikipedia ... ! I for sure will ask for you astarti34 , if this persists . That user with an ip knows too much about wikipedia for not having an account such as the NPOV term , which frankly not even i know what it means !!! And in the same day you come along , being from the same country , trying to do the same exact thing , chaning goverment references , which are used for a state to get loans , and claiming that they are not trustworthy enough when even the Worldbank agrees !!!

It is preety clear to see that if you follow the edits of these 3 last days , which have been unconstructive , mal intentioned , and all of them being users from the same country , or editos of greece such as WilliamThweatt . ( Malbin210 (talk) 22:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC) )[reply]

You are provocative. The only common thing I have with the other 2 users is that we dont like your edit war that wants to promote your country and reduce the credibility of Wikipedia. I personally replaced the dubious Albanian Minstry of econony (!) figures with the ones THAT YOU said are credible, i.e. the IMF! See, when it suits you, you go with the IMF, then it doesnt you go with the Albanian Ministry. You also did the same for the rest of the users, constantly reverting sourced material. You are albanian and this is absolutely fine -nothing more or less expected. There isnt a nationalistic perspective in my edits, neither of the rest of the users as far as i saw. They presented credible sourced material. I presented facts from the IMF. By stating that this is nationalistic, only proves that what I believe for you and your edits is right: You only want to twist things up to re-enforce your false opinion. This ain't going to happen. There are rules in Wikipedia and you need to obey them. Astarti34 (talk) 23:30, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will repeat to you for the myriad time , that there is no disagreement between the IMF , the WORLDBANK , and the ALBANIAN MINISTRY OF ECONOMICS for the figure of gdp ( you can check it out and you will see that they are the same !!!! ) , the difference is in the gdp per capita , and the reason is the population used to divide the total gdp !!! IMF uses 3,4 milion , but the ministry of economics of albania uses 2.831 because the SENSUS of 2011 showed 2.831 residents , and that is the official figure !!! Thus the GDP per capita is 25 % more than what the imf shows ... and thats what the ministry of economics of albania is showing as well !!!!! Shall we continue this pointless discussion , when the explanation CANNOT BE more simple than this . CHECK THE FIGURES on your own , all links are there  !!!!( Malbin210 (talk) 00:30, 12 February 2014 (UTC) )[reply]

I think user malbin is right. This anonymous Greek user not only has a great bias for Albania but also also for Islam .he is fighting over a simple image change in religion section . orthodox albanians are just 6.75% of populace compared to 58.79% for Islam . even catholic Albanians outnumber orthodox Albanians. I know the reason behind this(Greeks are orthodox!).this user has seriously disturbed the whole article of albania. And another thing I wanna say that Greece is now poorer that Albania and is now ruined by austerity measures and anti government protests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mingling2 (talkcontribs) 15:50, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User Minglink2 , is a religious fanatic ... probably a sock puppet account from a previous user from Pakistan ( who got banned multiple times for the same reason ) , that is vandalizing articles about religion , and has a certain fantasy with albania , which in fact does not correspond with reality ... ! Get a life , albania is a multireligious mostly agnostic country .... ! Let me stress out that , the same administrator will be notified that banned you last time ! ( Malbin210 (talk) 17:40, 21 February 2014 (UTC) )[reply]
oh god malbin and above mentioned anonymous user are the two sides of the same coin. I don't know what your fairy tales of a sockpuppet really are? But as an albanian I know that the vast majority of Albanians are not atheist or agnostic. The dominant religion in Albania is money worship. Although some people after communism have converted to Islam and xianity but main reason behind the fact that majority of albanians identify as Moslems or Christians is that there was no option for money worshipism on the census questionnaire. Another thing I want to say is that no country article on wikipedia has two different estimates for GDP. The most reliable source for real GDP is Albanian ministry of economics not worldbank. World bank estimates that Albanian populace is 3.2 million compared to actual figure of 2.8. So the difference is obvious. There no need to have two estimates for GDP. Further Albania is one of the few nations in Europe whose GDP is growing rapidly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mingling2 (talkcontribs) 15:46, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Where there are widely differing estimates by otherwise reliable sources, giving a range of those estimates is preferred to just picking which ever one a particular editor likes better. And, regarding the reliability of sources, generally speaking, international sources (such as World Bank) are more reliable than a government's own estimate which oftentimes tends to be inflated.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 16:19, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Violent images

Attacking a Turkish camp is an act of violence by some Albanians, we should not foorget that may Albanians did oppose Skenderbeg and some of his acts of violence doesn't come in par with Albanian values (such pictures should be put in Skenderbeg's own page not Albania's official page...lets be progressive182.182.11.11 (talk) 16:00, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's an odd rationale. The images are not supposed to promote any particular point of view (progressive, etc.), but rather illustrate some of the notable events in the history of the country's territory. Whether Albanians supported or opposed Skanderbeg is beside the point; by that thinking, we should remove Hitler's picture from Germany. The image you'd like to add would probably be more relevant at Albanian language if a similar image isn't already there. --Local hero talk 16:09, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with Local hero . In addition , Skanderbeg is the (only ) national hero of Albania ... and maybe the most important figure in Albania s history . I will also point out , that thats an odd rationale, very odd indeed . Please do not remove established material without consensus . — Preceding unsigned comment added by John221989 (talkcontribs) 16:25, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CIA FACTBOOK

There is a new census in Albania. Every country page in Wikipedia has its ethnic statistics based on CIA Factbook, as such, this page should have them based to it.Balkanian`s word (talk)

A long discussion is located here: Talk:Albania/Archive_6#Ethnic_groups_in_the_infobox, in general infoboxes of countries are based on widely established numbers in bibliography. By the way the 2011 is rejected by almost all parts, not to mention that 15,5% aren't included in any ethnic group, i.e. this makes all the figures questionable since all of them claim a share from this.

You need to explain why you are eager to remove a several reliable sources. Alexikoua (talk) 18:11, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This statement: "there is a consensus on Demographics of Albania. Cia Factbook is used everywhere on infoboxes" is incorrect and can not be used as justification for addition of text contrary to position of other editors.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:20, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is the only reliable source we have. All the sources in there are OLD, prior to the new census. They are just OLD DATA. The new census gives that 15.5% of the population did not want to declare its ethnicity. Thats just what we should say. The rest is just OR.95.107.208.205 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:39, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Old statistics can still be cited with old, yet reliable, references. Epicgenius (talk) 18:42, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You say that CIA Factbook is not a reliable source? It is a fresh reliable source, so old reliable soruces should be gone, as a fresh one comes. COMMON SENSE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.107.208.205 (talk) 18:51, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that we all agree that new data should be used in this article, as it seems that nobody contradicts it. As such, I am going to put those data in the article.Balkanian`s word (talk)

@BW: You must be kidding. Questioned data that have been refuted by intenational organizations can't be part of the infobox. Off course there is a correspodent section which explains why this 2011 census is completely unreliable and caused serious reactions inside and out Albania. In general pretending that there is a consensus isn't a valid argument and instant reverting is disruptive in this case.Alexikoua (talk) 19:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Except of the International Organization called User:Alexikoua, and Interlunar Organization Omonoia, who else did question the data? Because, as far as I can see, the CIA Factbook cites exactly those unquestioned data. And of course, if you do not agree that something obvious is not obvious it does not mean that it can last for ever in this ridiciolous situation.95.107.208.205 (talk) 19:40, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that the article is a target of various unlogged/blogged evading and returnee edit warriors. In case no decent arguments are presented the previous concensus version will be restored. @Balkanian: wp:canvassing is generally considered disruptive behavior and will be reported.Alexikoua (talk) 21:07, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, apart from removing all related wp:rs list even the one and single cia number is falsified: There is nowhere written that from the 15.5% that refused to declare their ethnicity 99% of them speak Albanian... It seems that this is nothing more than a childish attempt to established a wp:or&wp:pov ethnic homogeneity in the country.Alexikoua (talk) 21:48, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
By checking the available metarial there is not the slightest 'new' argument to support the 2011 figures. It's also not the first refuted census conducted in the Balkans, a similar situation occurred in the Republic of Macedonia where the proceddure was problemating from the beginning. To name some official reposts by international organization about the above census:
  • EUDO Observatory on Citizenship[[1]]:

    These ongoing debates in Albania follow the ones in Macedonia where the census was stopped last October due to irregularities in the field, as well as disagreements between the Macedonian and Albanian members of the commission. Undoubtedly they attest to the highly volatile nature of politics of numbers and identity in the Balkans.

  • World_Council_of_Churches [[2]]:

    The World Council of Churches would like to express its concern on the methodology followed and on the reliability of the results of the 2011 Census in Albania

Not to mention that it was boycotted by several sides [[3]][[4]] . Thus, there is no wonder why the last concensus here was in favor of widely established numbers in western bibliography in general.Alexikoua (talk) 22:31, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so John221987 = Balkanian's word = anon editor? It's kinda hard to keep up with it. Anyways, I stand by what I've said previously, as in the link Alexikoua presented above. The demographic situation in Albania is not very clear, therefore we should not be trying to fit it into the infobox at all. It can be handled in the Demographics section where we can explain that the census results are disputed and also present other estimates from other sources. --Local hero talk 00:19, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. John221987 is most likely Bonender and Balkanian is IP 95.107.208.205. For more information please see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/John221989. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 00:37, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Again and again and again The Moon is made of green cheese. So we have that a census, organized by the Government of Albania, which was RECOGNIZED by international governmental organizations, the US Government (CIA factbook), the United Nations, is not recognized by Omonoia organization. EUDO Observatory on Citizenship just says that there were ONGOING DEBATES, it says NOTHING about the RELIABILITY OF THE RESULTS, while the World Council of Churches, expresses some concerns, of course as common sense, if such a thing exists, shows it is about the RELIGIOUS DATA and not the ETHNIC DATA, which we are discussing. So, besides some users in Wikipedia and Omonia, can ANYONE just tell me, who on earth does say that this data are not reliable???? About the rest, OLD DATA are just OLD DATA and as such they should be replaced by NEW DATA. About the fact that 99% of those who did not declare ethnicity had Albanian as they mother tangue, it is true that is missreferenced. The real number is 99.26% and the real reference is the OFFICIAL data of the census. Meanwhile, the Census data are used EVERYWHERE ON WIKIPEDIA. On Albanians, it is said that Albanians in Albania are 2,312,356, refering to the census. On Demographics of Albania of course the data are from the census, and so forth and so on... As this story, is quite funny, the lead itself of THIS page, says that "Tirana was home to 421,286 of the country's 2,831,741" referring to.......THE CENSUS once again! So, please, can ANYONE, just tell me who does think that those data are not reliable, except of some wikipedians and some nonrelevant NGOs????Balkanian`s word (talk) 13:17, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You just refuted your position yourself. There is a consensus that wikipedia should not use data from the latest controversial census in Albania. Based on your explanation that CIA Factbook uses controversial census data, it should not be used as source for demography of Albania. Please drop the stick.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:07, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks God, not everything you dream is a consensus. There is no such consensus. And if you refute to answe my question it just means you are pov pushing without any argument.Balkanian`s word (talk) 18:29, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@BW: I suggest you do an "in depth" research on the topic. After all it's not the first census in the Balkans that's ignored in western media and bibliography. Claiming that only 85% in Albania are Albanians isn't realistic, same with the rest of numbers.Alexikoua (talk) 10:46, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is totally OR. Cia factbook is citing it. You cannot being a single international organization that doesignore it. Tactical refusal to discuss the source i vrought cannot be used as a way ti not update pages. Please find sources!Balkanian`s word (talk) 11:09, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunatelly you misused even the one source you support: there is nowhere to see that from the 15% that didn't declare ethnicity 98% of them are Albanian speakers. By the way the only one in this discussion that supports this extreme point is you, not to mention excessive canvassing, aggresive speech, blind reverting and the most important no serious arguments so far.Alexikoua(talk) 11:24, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You refuse to read too. As i said earlier About the fact that 99% of those who did not declare ethnicity had Albanian as they mother tangue, it is true that is missreferenced. The real number is 99.26% and the real reference is the OFFICIAL data of the census.. Wp is not about the amount of those who agree is about agreeing on sources!Balkanian`s word (talk) 11:31, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As I've expected you misused even the one and only source you present, nowhere in CIA is this written, so apart from wp:pov we have also a severe case of wp:synth, claiming that all people that didn't declare their ethnicity are ethnic-Albanians. To sum up a highly controversial census should be treatied with heavy precaution by this community... the more it has no place in any infobox per long established concensus in this talkpage.Alexikoua (talk) 11:36, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alexikoua, please stop calling it a controversial census, unless you have references from relevant international organizations that dispute it. As you do not have it is a clear case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT!Balkanian`s word (talk) 12:02, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]