Jump to content

Talk:Skanderbeg

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 178.149.9.21 (talk) at 17:21, 8 December 2018 (Undid revision 872698654 by Calthinus (talk)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good article nomineeSkanderbeg was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 2, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
January 28, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Template:Vital article

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Gjon Kastrioti which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 07:31, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Serbian origin theory.

Why were my edits removed? I just don't understand, you just remove it without any reason. It also had sources AND the same sentences are on this page and this. If that many sources are not enough, I will give even more. MilosHaran (talk) 18:29, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Like much of nobility in the Middle Ages, he had mixed roots. His mother was very likely from a Slavic background -- although what specifically that was could probably debated between Serbian, Macedonian and Bulgarian (many of the Slavs even in Kosovo could be called "Bulgarian" in the time period given considerable prior Bulgarian rule). Of course for Balkan nationalists this means they get to claim the national heroes of neighboring (and sometimes hostile) nations as their "own". Obviously this is ridiculous, and this very tribal conception of national identity is one reason why Balkan disputes are the laughingstock of the rest of Europe. Nevertheless, on Wikipedia we have to deal with this bullshit from time to time -- witness also the longstanding Croatian nationalist campaign to emphasize how Nikola Tesla was born in Croatia-- now enshrined in the Hall of Lame, not to mention Milos Obilic (or should I say "Millosh Kopilli" as some Kosovar Albanians wishfully think). Do we need a coatrack section about this on this page? No, we don't.--Calthinus (talk) 12:44, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support inclusion of text about Skanderbeg's Serb origin - Per Wikipedia:Verifiability and Calthinus. I agree with Calthinus that it is wrong to present this person as ethnically 100% Albanian. The proposed text about his Serb origin deserves place in this article having in mind that there is a scientific consensus that Skanderbeg was of Serb origin trough his father (diff). Majority of contemporary reliable sources emphasize that Skanderbeg was Serb also trough his mother. I agree with what Calthinus wrote about Croatian and Albanian nationalisms and how they get to .... claim the national heroes of neighboring .... nations as their "own".. I also agree with Calthinus that text about Skanderbeg's Serb origin do not deserve a whole section. A couple of short proposed paragraphs can be placed in section about Skanderbeg's early life. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:20, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Cute. However, there is no such "scientific consensus" and for inclusion such paragraphs will need to be amended to adhere to WP:NPOV on this issue, which there is not a consensus about (on Wikipedia or in scholarship). --Calthinus (talk) 17:42, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I fully agree with Antidiskriminator. Jingiby (talk) 17:34, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Jingiby I take this to mean you are also asserting there is a "scientific consensus that Skanderbeg was of Serb origin through his father"? --Calthinus (talk) 17:42, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There are several theories on Skanderbeg's origin, that he had some Serbian, Greek, Macedonian etc origins. This is a similar case to those of many national heroes, and is closely linked with nationalism. A possible Serbian origin of his mother is widely supported among scholars, and I have given that theory most of weight in the stuff about Skanderbeg's mother on this article. On the other hand, a possible Serbian origin of the Kastrioti family has not wide support among scholars, and we are not to present every theory on this article. Otherwise, Tesla, Alexander the Great, Markos Botsaris articles would be a mess. Alternative views on the Kastrioti family's origin are present in relevant articles, if I am not mistaken. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:46, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am not shure if there is a "scientific consensus that Skanderbeg was of Serb origin through his father", but probably he had partial Slavic ancestry in his paternal and maternal lines, as well as Albanian and maybe even some Greek. Jingiby (talk) 17:55, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Claims on some Greek origins of Skanderbeg are fringe and are supported only by some Greek nationalists and Arvanites, Greeks of Albanian ancestry many of whom believe that they are modern Dorians. From all theories on some non-Albainian origins of Skanderbeg, the one cliaming that his mother was a Serb has wide support among scholarship. Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:02, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, Bulgarians never lived in Kosovo. Kosovo was populated mainly by Slavic tribes, read Constantine Porphyrogenitus. The tribes were probably Serbized by 12th century. Dude, it's not fair to compare Nikola Tesla who lived in 20th century and Skanderbeg who lived in 15th century. Milos Obilic can not be Albanian, because simple etymology, "Milos", which means "dear" and "(K)Obilic", he gained that surname through legend that he was born by a mare. There aren't even any primary sources that claims that he was Albanian. Here's the real signature of Skanderbeg that I found in Ragusa's archives, where he clearly knew Serbian language. Sorry for being barbaric and angry and starting war edits. I now just want you to give me any primary source that he was Albanian, so we should we start debate that should we put Serbian origin theory or not. MilosHaran (talk) 01:24, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ethnic composition map of the Balkans from Andrees Allgemeiner Handatlas, 1st Edition, Leipzig 1881.
Secondly, Kosovo was ceded from the Byzantine Empire to the First Bulgarian Empire circa 840 and remain part from it until circa 1015. The development of Old Church Slavonic literacy in the country and the acceptation of Orthodoxy, had the effect of preventing the assimilation of the South Slavs into neighboring cultures, which promoted the formation of a distinct Bulgarian identity. As result the numerous Slavic tribes in that broad area from the Danube to the north, to the Aegean Sea to the south, and from the Adriatic Sea to the west, to the Black Sea to the east, accepted the common ethnonym "Bulgarians". During the 9th. century the Bulgarians established a form of national identity that despite far from modern nationalism, helped them to survive as a distinct entity through the centuries. After 1015 till the end of the 12th. century Kosovo was part from a Byzantine province called Bulgaria (theme). Kosovo was also occasionally part from the Second Bulgarian Empire during 13th. century. The Serbs ruled over it during the 14th century. Afterwards followed 500 years Ottoman rule. By the way, Marin Barleti who wrote during the 15th. century the biography of Skanderbeg, when talking about the inhabitants of the area where he was born, calls them "Bulgarians". With the rise of modern nationalism during the 19th. century Western and Russian ethnographers often displayed on their maps or described the southern parts of Kosovo's Slavic population as Bulgarian. It was part of the Bulgarian Exarchate at that time. For example, the second man into the hierarchy of the Bulgarian Revolutionary Central Committee then - Dimitar Obshti, was from Kosovo. More, an article published in the Belgian magazine Ons Volk Ontwaakt (Our Nation Awakes) on 21 December 1912 estimated 827,100 inhabitants in the Vilajet of Kosovo from whom: Christian Bulgarians - 250,000; Muslim Bulgarians - 14,000; Orthodox Serbs - 113,000; Mixed (Bulgarian-Serbian) - 22,000. By the way, there are still some Slavs who retained their Bulgarophile sentiments. In May 2018, about 500 of them have filed a petition in the country's parliament demanding official recognition of the Bulgarian community here. Stop pushing biased info. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 05:03, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
250,000 Muslim Bulgarians??? I just wonder where they have went after 10 years. Yeah, Bulgarian Empire controlled eastern Kosovo, while Serbia western, the border was near the city Drsnik. The Bulgaria theme map isn't right, there is no Duklja, there are no sources that Bulgaria theme even had Kosovo in the article also owner of that map even said that it's not accurate. Cite me where Marlin Barleti said that Skanderbeg was Bulgarian. So what if that Dimitar Obshti was from Kosovo? That doesn't prove anything. Bulgarophiles is a term used for people from region of Macedonia and region of Pomoravlje, but where is Kosovo? Not even true that Bulgarians had Kosovo in 13th century. Please check facts friend. MilosHaran (talk) 11:16, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please, write and read more carefully! Christian Bulgarians - 250,000; Muslim Bulgarians - 14,000. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 11:32, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Slavic bro, haven't saw it, but where they went after 10 years? MilosHaran (talk) 11:37, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please, check the Report of the International Commission on the Balkan Wars. Especially p. 158. Those who declared themselves as Bulgarians were, harassed or deported. The high clergymen of Bulgarian Orthodox Church were also deported. Bulgarian schools were closed and teachers expelled. All the Slavic population not depending on its identity was forced to declare as Serbs. Those who refused were tortured. The International Commission concluded that the Serbian state started a wide sociological experiment of assimilation through terror in its new territories. Jingiby (talk) 11:54, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's Macedonia, we are talking about western Kosovo. MilosHaran (talk) 12:09, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ethnological map by the French Professor Constant Desjardins (1787‒1876). This map bears the title „Serbia and the districts in which Serbian language is spoken". It was issued in Belgrade in 1853.
Citation from the report on the Serbs: "They have not merely resumed possession of their ancient domain, the Sandjak of Novi-Bazar and Old Servia proper (Kosovo Pole and Metohia), despite the fact that this historic domain was strongly Albanian; they have not merely added thereto the tract described by patriotic Servian ethnographers as "Enlarged Old Servia" (an ancient geographical term which we have seen twice enlarged)." The second map is a Serbian map from the mid. of the 19th. century. This map had been put together according to Serbian authors. Per this map, there is revealed the area where Serbian language is spoken and Serbs lived then. It stretches approximately northwest from the line: Prizren-Pristina-Prokuplje-Nis. East from that line, there were no Serbs. Jingiby (talk) 12:33, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So, you are telling me that Serbs never lived in Kosovo in 15th century? MilosHaran (talk) 12:58, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No way. Firstly ethnic Serbs settled the area at the end of the 12th century, but look above. You are claiming that Bulgarians never lived in Kosovo, provided that the area was ceded to Bulgaria in the mid. of the 9th. century and there are still thousands of people with Bulgarian identity. Jingiby (talk) 13:07, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No brother, I haven't said or thought that, Bulgarians may Bulgarized Slavic tribes in Kosovo, but in eastern Kosovo, not western, because western was under Serbian control from circa 780 when Viseslav united all Serbian tribes, but Simeon conqured Serbia in circa 927, and then western Kosovo was in Serbian control again circa 931, when Caslav came and reunited all Serbian tribes, then in 969 western Kosovo became part of Byzantium theme of Serbia. In 1081 Constantine Bodin (known in your history as Tsar Peter III), probably conqured western Kosovo and give it to Vukan. Stefan Nemanja conquered all Kosovo in 1183 and Kosovo was under Serbian control until 15th century. MilosHaran (talk) 13:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bulgarians controlled Kosovo for some centuries. In the 15th century the population of Kosovo was mixed, it consisted of Serbs, Albanians, Bulgarians, Vlachs, Italians. The local dialect of Orahovac is a mixture of Albanian, Serbian, Turkish and Bulgarian languages, and Orahovac is in western Kosovo. Even today there are people of Bulgarian origin in Albania, next to its border with Kosovo. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but Serbs were a big majority at that time. Look at this article Demographic history of Kosovo. Also, his great grandfather's name was Branilo/Branko, which is used mainly by Serbs and Croats, not Bulgarians. MilosHaran (talk) 13:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Academics debate whether the said Branilo was Skanderbeg's ancestor. Furthermore, the origin of a name is irrelevant. Many non-Serbs in the Balkans of that time had Serbian names. Even today many placenames in Greece and Albania have Slavic origin. Are Greeks and Albanians Slavic nations? No. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
None of said here is enough to eliminate a widely known idea Skanderbeg was Serb/Serb origin, and Antidiskriminator post is the one I support here. FkpCascais (talk) 14:12, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think that there is such theory: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL but it is far from widely known idea. Among the most reliable search engines as Google scholar, HighBeam and JSTOR the result is = 0. Jingiby (talk) 14:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you looked at the demographics article. Okay then, I will put it through article, as seeing people supporting it. MilosHaran (talk) 14:27, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The theory that Skanderbeg's mother had Serbian origin is on the article. It is supported by a considerable number of academics. The theory that Skanderbeg's father had Serbian origin does not have considerable support by academics. It is part of discussions about Albanians-Serbs conflict, and ways how the two groups have helped each other. It has a political context. Hence we are not going to present every theory here. The matter is explained on relevant articles. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:36, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dude, I haven't made that sentences, I found them on Wikipedia. Yeah we will not put a Skenderbeg theory on Skenderbeg's article, better find other one. Yeah, maybe Albanian academics. MilosHaran (talk) 14:43, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, well there has been some past editors who have pushed fringe theories popular only in Serbian historiography on Wikipedia, people are lazy about cleaning it up, and I suppose this is the result. A good number of them are banned now, though I know at least one is socking but pulling an SPI on him is just not worth it right now. The guy fought and gave his life for a land called "Albania". That makes him Albanian. Yes he had some Slavic ancestry. This is already covered on the page, but that's not enough for you -- and what's shocking is that I guess Albanian-Serb fights aren't enough, as you even go into denialism about Bulgaria's long and significant history in the Western Balkans and indeed the significant historical presence of ethnic Bulgarians in the area. Enough. Contribute constructively or don't. --Calthinus (talk) 15:40, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Check MilosHaran's edits. They have tried today to push a POV that there was no Bosnian identity in the Middle Ages. Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:44, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jingiby: Antonina Zhelyazkova mentions a Venetian source where Scanderbeg's mother is considered Bulgarian and not Serbian. "It is a curious circumstance that Skanderbeg's mother was a Slav woman, according to some sources a Bulgarian named Voisava, a fact recorded in an anonymous Venetian chronicle: "Huic uxor fuit Voisava, Pologi Domini filia, est autem Pologum oppidum in Macedoniae et Bulgarie confinibus" [1] Vargmali (talk) 16:00, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

" The guy fought and gave his life for a land called "Albania". That makes him Albanian'." What reliable source back this claim? FkpCascais (talk) 16:17, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re FkpCascais, actually it's not necessary for me to provide sources for things I say only on talk pages-- otherwise I might be asking you for a source for your claim that "it's widely known that Skanderbeg was Serb/Serb origin" (check your grammar there bro). "Widely known" maybe by the readers of Serbian nationalist historiography which among other things calls Croats "Catholicized Serbs", pretends Bosniaks never existed, pretends Albanians never existed, and ignores Bulgarian history in the Western Balkans. Also re the "personal" comment, no actually I'm not even from the Balkans but let's WP:SPADE here, but even to me it is plain as day that the sole reason for this is provoking Albanians (is he a matter of great importance to Serbia? No, not really...). It's not acceptable, and if you lower yourself to this standard, don't be surprised by the result.--Calthinus (talk) 16:35, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am persuaded by Vargmali's source. Marin Barleti is his writing mentioned a Bulgarian tribe is Dibra area.[2] I think we should make changes to reflect WP:NPOV. Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:26, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the link of his family with Serbian empire is totally omissed in the article, whys? Starting to being sources:
There are a lot of Bulgarian sources, some of them reliable, claiming his mother was a Bulgarian woman. Jingiby (talk) 16:34, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Of couse, we shouyld mention in the article that Bulgarian sources claim Voisava as Bulgarian. FkpCascais (talk) 16:39, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, those views are in fact maybe a fringe theory? Jingiby (talk) 16:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
HERE'S THE FULL LIST OF EARLY 20th CENTURY HISTORIANS THAT CLAIMS HE HAD SERBIAN ORIGIN. Let see what will you say on this. :) MilosHaran (talk) 16:47, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats, you found a source from 1943, 1905, and the 1870s, and then one that looks like it was written maybe centuries ago(?) and uploaded them on Imgur. WP:RS--Calthinus (talk) 16:59, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Of course my friend. Here is photo of the page of book ″Historia univeryale racolta di Francesco Sansovino″ written by Italian scholar Francesco Sansovino, who lived 1 century later.MilosHaran (talk) 17:00, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RS. --Calthinus (talk) 17:04, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, here's on Google books. I don't see why he is not reliable, he even studied law at the universities of Padua and Bologna. MilosHaran (talk) 17:30, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The addition of the view that the "Triballi" were Bulgarians is in accordance with WP:NPOV. The view that Voisava was a member of Muzaka family should also be added. @MilosHaran Read WP:Primary and do not use old sources published centuries ago. Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:35, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why? A man who lived 1 century after isn't reliable, did he even had a reason to lie? Why is then Marin Barleti reliable? OK then, here are the newer sources: 1 2 and here's list of other sources. MilosHaran (talk) 17:50, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In "Problems of the Formation of the Albanian People, Their Language, and Culture: (selection) issued by Akademia e Shkencave e RPS të Shqipërisë, "8 Nëntori" Publishing House, 1984 on p. 329 is explained that Martin Barletty calls the Slavs «Illyrians» and the Bulgarians «Tribalis» (Bulgari siue Tribali). Jingiby (talk) 17:57, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @MilosHaran You should read the said policies before getting involved in topics that seem to be difficult for you. That there is a theory that Skanderbeg had Serbian origin (from his mother) is showed on the article. Read WP:Primary, WP:Undue, WP:NPOV. Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:00, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But I want to prove that theory for his father exists too. For WP:Undue and WP:NPOV I have sent non-Serbian sources so I don't see any reason to they broke neutral viewpoint. I don't see which rule I broke on WP:Primary. MilosHaran (talk) 18:14, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read those policies entirely? Do you understand them now? There are theories that Skanderbeg had Greek, Turkish and Macedonian origin. They, similarily to the theory that his father had Serbian origin, do not have considerable acceptance. The article should reflect only what is generally accepted as viable theory. Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:18, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This dispute has gone on for years long before any of us ever edited. The result is always the same. Some sources say Skanderbeg had some Serbian origins. Others say he was completely Albanian (yes). Some sources say he was Greek, Bulgarian, whatever. Welcome to the Balkans where people have nothing better to do than claim each other's national heroes. This page is not changing to say we know for a fact he was a Serb, just as we are not changing Markos Botsaris to say he was Albanian, or Nikola Tesla and et cetera. You said you can be a constructive editor on the other talk page under your topic "Bosnian identity did not exist" (ahem). If that's true, then quit wasting our time and your own time too here. --Calthinus (talk) 18:21, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jingiby So what? Serbs were also called Triballi in history. The first Serbian king Mihailo Vojislavljevic had title "King of Serbs and Triballs", Niketas Choniates called also Serbs Triballi. Mehmed the Conqueror in his looting of Serbia mentions Triballs as Serbs. Demetrios Chalkokondyles also calls Serbs Triballs, even flag of the First Serbian uprising has symbol of Triballs. MilosHaran (talk) 18:28, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What about: Bulgarians never lived in Kosovo? Stop nonsensic claims, please. Full stop for now. Jingiby (talk) 18:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I HAVEN'T SAID THAT BULGARIANS HAVEN'T LIVED IN KOSOVO. Here are the sources for Serbs called Triballs: 1, for second one I couldn't find it on the internet, but it's C. Paparrigopoulos History of the Greek nation, Athens, 1874, vol. 5, p. 489. And for the third page 120. You can check for the First Serbian uprising flag on Wikipedia. MilosHaran (talk) 18:45, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, you did say ["Firstly, Bulgarians never lived in Kosovo"]. It's one thing to lie, it's another thing to lie when the evidence of the falsehood is right in front of our faces.--Calthinus (talk) 16:03, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jingby, Triballi ´s are more associated to Serbs than to Bulgarians. Milos, the best sources are the secundary sources from scholars. A secundary source from a historian analising some primary source has much more value than primary source being interpretd by ourselves. Just for you to know. FkpCascais (talk) 19:36, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is enough information here or to any knowledgable person to permanently dispute this article factual accuracy. Please do not remove desputed untill you prove the claims in article with reliable sources (cannot be done obviously, simply because this can be clasified as 'fake history (fake news..)). 178.149.9.21 (talk) 16:15, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian editors dismissed IP concerns

... however, just looking for the collection of sources gathered here, looks like the concerns were legit. FkpCascais (talk) 21:20, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Random blogs are now legit sources? Wikipedia policy has not changed. Editing on wp:idontlikeit issues does not suffice. Please consult wp:reliable before supporting the ramblings of an IP.Resnjari (talk) 21:23, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I know more then well what reliable sources are. But the content at that blog can be checked, and it is right, and they are reliable sources. I can go and post them here one by one obviously. FkpCascais (talk) 22:07, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not the one supporting the ramblings of an IP, then citing a blog to back a position. Blogs are not reliable sources. I should also state to you calling editors "Albanian" is not needed. People can be whatever origin or descent they wish, that should not be part of any any discussion. Resnjari (talk) 22:10, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Who is talking about blogs? I am talking about the sources cited at that blog. I thought you were wise enough to uderstand that. (Did I ever added a blog to an article as a source? Never obviously). Forget the blog, focus on the sources cited there. The blog is just usefull couse it has links to them, all in one page. FkpCascais (talk) 22:15, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
About the edit your colleague was blindly reverting me immediatelly in less then a minute, well, I understand for you is helpfull to leave an idea that ther are people who claim his origin was something else than Albanian, and put them all in same bag, but the fact is that having plenty of reliable sources claiming his Serbian origin cannot be equalised to one local Bulgarian source claiming he was Bulgarian origin. This situations have separated sources sourcing each claim. FkpCascais (talk) 22:22, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your back tracking. You never said anything about sources in a blog. You just placed a link to a blog. Also if your going to make edits, why not use the sources yourself instead of calling editors you have disagreements as "Albanian" (what a person's origin may or may not be ought to be excluded), then agreeing with an IP who comments where removed as they are sock [1] and then palcing a blog and your reason. Disappointing, just disappointing. FkpCascais please strikeout your comment about someone being my colleague. Your are not attempting to build good faith and continuing to show wp:battleground behavoir.Resnjari (talk) 22:25, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at FkpCascais' additions there are problems. The first is his addition of Theodōros Spandouginos [2]. The source is a English translation of a Greek medaevil text from the 1530s. That is wp:primary and WP:AGEMATTERS. Please especially on things like this about origin, RS sources that are wp:secondary for neutrality purposes. The second source that was added [3] by Waltz does not refer to Skanderbeg as Serbian, but only mentions the Serb factor in Alb history at that point in time. So its an OR addition to the article.Resnjari (talk) 22:43, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Resnjari I concur. I also find [his deletion of sourced info regarding Voisava's probably Bulgarian origin] and violations of WP:CLAIM to be problematic. --Calthinus (talk) 23:40, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Calthinus, the editor @FkpCascais said in their edit [4] "And dont remove sources". Thoughts?Resnjari (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we can replace it with "A Serbian by birth,... (refering to Skanderbeg) "Guerrilla Warfare: A Historical and Critical Study" page 15. FkpCascais (talk) 00:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please feel free to add the sources to each claim. But the two are completelly separate claims, Serbian or Bulgarian are two totally different things. FkpCascais (talk) 23:43, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please notece how I have sources which claim he was of Serbian descent (without doubt), and I didn´t removed the word "possible" (leaving doubts). I am being carefull and not adopting clear POV´s. FkpCascais (talk) 23:59, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FkpCascais why are we going to added sources for "each claim" especially when they are wp:primary or don't have to do the the subject of origins etc. Clearly your second edit does not refer to origins. Your first edit uses a source that is over 500 years old. Both ought not to be there.Resnjari (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Because they directly refer to the origin of Skanderbeg. FkpCascais (talk) 23:59, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You may think that you are not "adopting clear POVs" but Resnjari is correct that there seems to be one set of rules applied to Serbian arguments versus Bulgarian "claims", and one side has you deleting sources, and the other one, adding more text for each... Serbian origin arguments should not get any more space than Bulgarian ones, for starters.--Calthinus (talk) 00:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. So lets expand each on its own with their own sources. Thanks. FkpCascais (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But please, bring academic, non-local, meaning non-Albanian, Serbian or Bulgarian sources, for the claims. How many you have for Bulgarian origin in that case? But if you want, we can use local sources and turn this into a mess, cause, want me to bring Serbian historians? FkpCascais (talk) 00:27, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FkpCascais, both of edits ought to be removed for reasons outlined. However you do make a point about other such sources and i'm ok with that on this bit. For the Voisava sentence, other sources for removal should be the http://www.makedonika.org source by Petrovski from the sentence as it does not meet wp:secondary. I'm not fussed over the Bulgarian source either way. Others though, don't know.Resnjari (talk) 00:40, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The edits cannot be returned to the state that the article was simply because there are no sources claiming Skanderbeg was bossibly of Serbian or Bulgarian descent. No source claims that. There are plenty of sources claiming he was of Serbian descent, and a few claiming Bulgarian descent. But those two things are very different, and no sources claim both simultaneously as (wrongly) added in the text earlier. Each claim is separate and should be sourced by the sources that claim it, as none of cited sourced the pevious text which implied he was either one or another, as claimed before. FkpCascais (talk) 00:50, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am an honest and direct person. And I see your game here. You want to add together one fringe theory (about him being Bulgarian) with one quite plausible one (being Serbian, which is backed by many sources) so you can disregard both that way as fringe. I disagree obviously, and if you are honest, you will all undestand why. FkpCascais (talk) 00:57, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FkpCascais, can you please withdraw your remarks and assumptions you have made about me. You should consult wp:civil. Your sources are based on wp:primary and wp:or. On the Bulgarian source, i am not fussed about it either way. Using your logic, Petrovski would also have to go.Resnjari (talk) 01:07, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, it can go, there will be still plenty of sources claiming his possible/certain Serbian origin, while Bulgarian origin would be just a fringe theory. Lets gather sources in both ways and see what the outcome would be. FkpCascais (talk) 01:20, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FkpCascais, you refer to gathering sources. What you do in your time is your business. What i do care is that the two additions of yours currently in the article are based on wp:primary and original research on a sentence which discusses Voisava.Resnjari (talk) 04:53, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Open question

In a totally unseen manner I want to adress you User:Resnjari, User:Calthinus and User:Ktrimi991 in all my respect. I will ask you one sincere question and I want you to erase it after reading it, if you feel so. The question is obviously about Skanderbeg. Here it goes:

How would you feel if you had an historical figure that existed in Serbia and was named Etrit, had brothers named Arlind, Amir and Arber, and sisters named Arbnora, Kujtime, Arbiona, Ana and Vera? That he was initially of Albanian Muslim faith, and that his grand-father faught for the Albanian medieval kingdom? That all his letters were written in Albanian or Latin, and that he fought Greeks which were Albanian enemies at the time (supposing so)? How woud you feel if this person was made-out as Serbian national hero, and nowadays all relation of him to Albania or Albanians was denied despite all obvious evidence? Oh, but he is not Etrit, he is Retrito, he is Napolitanian (some Napolitanian and fringe authors say so). Thus, his Albanian origin becomes confusing. Lets stick that he is Serbian.

Please delete this after reading. But just to make you know, I am against this modern-day tendency of showing like if Serbs and Albanians have some historical animosity. We dont. We were friends troughout the history and it was only at early 20th century that Vatican and Austria needed to prevent Serbia to access sea that they made us fight eachother. The truth is that we are brothers and we coexisted for long.

The white and the black double-headed eagle are two faces of one same coin. FkpCascais (talk) 01:59, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, to clarify, not all of us are Albanians. Anyways, Idk what Resnjari and Calthinus think but I am telling you sth. Some Albanians love to point out that many of Greek heroes (Botsaris etc) had Albanian origin. However, those heroes belong to Greece, as they contributed as leaders of Greece, not of Albania. Claiming the hero or heroes of another nation is a waste of time. Bonaparte served French interests, Stalin (from Georgia) served Russian interests etc. Anyhow, nobody is denying that Skanderbeg's mother was probably a Serb, the concern is that all theories should be given space on the article. In the end, Skanderbeg was an Albanian leader whose bravery benefited the entire Balkans and wider Europe, Serbs included. After all, Skanderbeg's army included Albanians, Italians, Serbs, Vlachs etc. Ktrimi991 (talk) 02:22, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FkpCascais, don't really care as many of these figures are found in the Balkans of any religion, linguistic or ethnic background etc. Origins differ from their personal self identification and vice versa. @Ktrimi has said it better then i could ever had. What i do care is that content added to this article is of encyclopedic standards. I am not in the camp that denies Skanderbeg had Slavic ancestry at least on his maternal side (Schmitt has done good work on this that goes beyond nationalistic Balkan academia). His origin on his maternal side does not defacto make him a Slav of either Serb or Bulgarian identity.Resnjari (talk) 04:50, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dušan the Mighty had Bulgarian mother and Bulgarian wife, was an Emperor of Serbs, Bulgarians, Greeks and Albanians but is part of the Serbian history. Jingiby (talk) 06:12, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Jingiby very good to point out. I might add that, thankfully, I have not seen even the most nationalistic Bulgarian editors pushing a campaign to rebrand Dushan as a Bulgarian. Thank goodness. As for me, FkpCascais, it seems you didn't get the memo that I"m not Albanian. Also it doesn't matter to me -- what does matter to me is a year long now campaign by a sockpuppeteer, with unfortunate assistance and approval from some established editors who happen to focus on Serbian topics, to provoke Albanian editors with this tribalistic nonsense.--Calthinus (talk) 06:36, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
More, his son Stefan Uroš V is 3/4 Bulgarian and in this way, Serbia had de facto Bulgarian ruler. Jingiby (talk) 07:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So everything Serbian is Bulgarian? No. We need sources like the Bulgarian one that associate directly Skanderbeg with Bulgarian origin, not trough SYNTH. FkpCascais (talk) 15:54, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dušan The Mighty was from Nemanjić dinasty and have nothing to do with Bulgarians simply because he identified as Serbian and his father was Serbian, he lived in Serbia, born in Serbia, he IS Serbian, there is no dispute about that. Just because my grandmother was Croatian that doesn't make me Croatian, I do identify as Serbian and that's ALL THAT MATTERS, so stop with the nonsense, Uroš The Weak was also Serbian because he identifies as such, and there is no dispute about it either, same as I know, if someone 100 years from now try to claim I am 'Croatian' and if I would be alive or watch from 'heaven' I would feel highly insulted, that doesn't mean I dislike or hate my family, it means that people who do not deserve to mention my name are claiming something false against me for their cheap political goals, and that's disgraceful and disgousiting. Same exact thing is happening to Skanderbeg, and I am sure if he was alive now, he would be disgousted at best. 178.149.9.21 (talk) 16:03, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Important notice for Wikipedia editors

This have to end, my writings here (ON THE TALK PAGE!) are deleted because of one (assumably) Albanian editor took freedom to ASSUME 'Sock puppetry' and at the same time gave himself a freedom to say what is and what isn't 'SOAP'. for both cases he had 0 evidence and acted on pure assumption, I am talking here about users Calthinus, Resnjari and few others. Furthermore, it need to be clarified that 'concensus' is artificial on this and many other pages, editors from NA and EU generally accept Albanian theories and nonsense 'by default' and take part in history falsification by Albaninas, despite the fact that it is well know by historians and evidence that Albanians started widespread fabrications about Skanderbeg in XIX century, and because editors from NA are mostly poorly educated on any historical facts (aside from mostly US propaganda), it is no surprise that 'concensus' gets inflated by poorly educated people who took the freedom to do the task they do not have competence to do. It is also worth nothing that Albanian mafia and government (that is basically the same thing) does sponsor propaganda and invests a lot of money in history fabrications. So, long story short, Albanians will lose at the end of this war, simply because falshood is unsustainable on the long run, therefore I will not waste my time on failed project trying to speak the truth. However, if any of the Albanians even attempt to revert my post on the talk page, I will be forced to take legal actions against them. Bye. 178.149.9.21 (talk) 16:03, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The factual accuracy of the article should be disputed!

Enough information is given by other users as well in talk to question factual accuracy of the article, please stop vandalizing it in edit wars. This is slight modification of my previous post that got deleted and you can view it in history, also such behaviour will be reported to Wikipedia administration. I will not waste my time in here any further, credible history books prove that Skanderbeg was Serbian that's more than pathetic to claim anything else, however, mafia is below me and they do not deserve my time. 178.149.9.21 (talk) 16:19, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "Albanian Identities" (PDF). {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url= (help)
  2. ^ Enis Sulstarova (March 2006). Arratisje Nga Lindja: Orientalizmi Shqiptar Nga Naimi Te Kadareja. Globic Press. p. 45. ISBN 9780977666249.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Skanderbeg&oldid=872702082"