Talk:Battle of Polog

Albania Mid‑importance

	Battle of Polog is part of the WikiProject Albania, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Albania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.AlbaniaWikipedia:WikiProject AlbaniaTemplate:WikiProject AlbaniaAlbania articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

League of Lezhë[edit]

If the league was dissolved in 1450, then why is it one of the combatants? Surely it should just be the Principality of Kastrioti, and the Princedom of Ariantiti? Dirifer (talk) 17:49, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You asked a very good question. I am trying to answer this question for some time.

Simplified solution: The easiest thing would be to proclaim that all local chieftains on the territory of Albania in 14th and 15th century were monarchs or princes who had their own independent states and state armies. In case of Skanderbeg the easiest thing would be to apply the same name for such imagined state as it has already been applied for the "state" controlled by his father (the Principality of Kastrioti). I guess it would even be possible to find some sources to support such solution.
Complex solution: I think that modern scholars who are specialists in the topic tell more complex story in their works. Most of the inhabited territory of Albania at that time belonged either to Ottoman Empire or to Venetian Empire. People from the remaining sparsely populated mountain region of Albania lived in tribal societies led by their local chieftains. One of them became Skanderbeg after he deserted Ottomans. Until 1443 all of them were under Ottoman suzerainty. They joined Skanderbeg's rebellion because they "rejected the Ottoman Empire and its new regulations, taxes and justice system. They tolerated no foreign judges among them and no interference in local affairs from a distant ruler." Based on that perspective it can be concluded that they were rebelled tribes led by their chieftains, some kind of hayduks, not state armies. Rebelion and rebels led by Skanderbeg are very complex topics which should be covered by their own articles. Something like "Skanderbeg's Rebelion" and "Skanderbeg's rebels". The latter could be the combatant in the articles about battles.

This is very important issue which is not related only to this article and should probably be discussed at some more "visible" place, i.e. WikiProject Military History and/or several related projects, in order to get as wide response as possible. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answer. Yes, i definitely agree with you. It would make more sense it the Albanian side was referred to as 'Skanderbeg's rebels' as the league was already gone. Dirifer (talk) 09:51, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nondiscussed move[edit]

This article was created Battle of Pollog and since then there has been no move request. Antidiskriminator attempted to move article to Battle of Polog without any discussion and their edit was immediately undone. Then before some days another editor attempted to do the same move without any discussion taking place. I undid this move explaining via my edit summary that that major change is to be discussed. Then the most strange thing happened: Antidiskriminator undid my edit calling it "nondiscussed move". It seems Antidiskriminator should not rush when talking about other editors' edits. Any reason why to move article is welcomed. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:00, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article was indeed created with LL version and renamed more than one year ago with nobody contesting renaming. That is considered as silent consensus. Anyway, I will request renaming. Best regards,--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:13, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 September 2016[edit]

This discussion was listed at Wikipedia:Move review on 4 October 2016. The result of the move review was RM closure endorsed.

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

The result of the move request was: Moved. Tough one this. Very close, and it's clear that both forms are used. In the end though, there is slightly more support than opposition, and the mentioned WP:CONSISTENCY as well as GHits give enough of a valid reason for us to go ahead and move. — Amakuru (talk) 13:32, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Pollog → Battle of Polog – Per WP:COMMON and WP:AT. Sources favor Polog to Pollog (92 vs 20). Pollog version is mostly used in translated works of Albanian historiography. Polog is also consistent with Polog article. Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC) --Relisting. — Amakuru (talk) 10:43, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support per guidelines.--Zoupan 18:01, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Why should Google decide which is right version. Then try another way, search "Battle of Pollog"(3,670,000 results) vs"Battle of Polog"(12,400 results).--Liridon (talk) 21:09, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why did write quotation marks here, when you did not use them. If you would have used them, the results would be Pollog 787 vs Polog 1310. GBS has advantage to simple google web search because per WP:GOOGLE, "Google Books has a pattern of coverage that is in closer accord with traditional encyclopedia content than is the Web...". --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Google doesn't decide, reliable sources do. Meatsgains (talk) 17:17, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I already pointed that LL version almost does not exist in English language sources found at GBS, apart from those of Albanian Historiography.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

English language sources found at GBS are not to your liking so you suggest Serbian language sources. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:18, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I went trough every page of GBS results I presented for Polog and did not find a single Serbian language source. Your speculation about what I like or not is irrelevant and does not belong to this talkpage.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:05, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly Oppose Antidiskriminator shows Serbian Google Books results which surely favor "Battle of Polog". English Google Books results clearly favor "Battle of Pollog" ([1] vs [2]). Even English Google search results clearly favor "Battle of Pollog ([3] vs [4]). Polog is really also consistent with Polog article but don't forget that toponyms have changed since the Middle Ages. Take for example Battle of Dyrrhachium and Durres. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:05, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- That is incorrect. Contrary to what you say, you again presented false results for search without quotation marks. Correct search results, with quotation marks favor Polog version.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:44, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - Your search results for "Battle of Polog" say: In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 10 already displayed. Those 1,360 results are just the same thing, copy of each other. Those results do not include any encyclopedia, book, journal or scholarship study, contrary to "Battle of Pollog" search results. English Google Books search results favor "Battle of Pollog" so I keep my oppose. Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:24, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support per guidelines and sources. --Axiomus (talk) 08:20, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support main article is called Polog not Pollog, so this should follow. And also per references. Svetisrdj (talk) 09:06, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose--Punëtoria (talk) 17:12, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.