Talk:Greater Albania/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Greater Albania in 1878? There wasn't even an Albania then.

Ok, hope no one has a problem with Elsie. The term didn't originate in the League of Prizren, which has nothing to do with it. Albania didn't even exist in 1878, so a "Greater Albania" could not have existed either. The term originated during Fascist Italy time in 1941 and was revived by Belgrade to justify Greater Serbia. This is per Robert Elsie. --Sulmues (talk) 18:45, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

A couple of things: The term "Greater Albania" may have been coined by Mussolini, but the concept of Greater Albania was dreamt up by the League of Prizren and many other nationalists long before then. Also, language such as "Belgrade propaganda" is highly POV, so it needs to go. Athenean (talk) 18:53, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Elsie says simply "Belgrade" without specifying. Let's leave it that way here as well, I suggest. Replaced "Belgrade" with "Serbian nationalist circles". How does that look? --Sulmues (talk) 18:56, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)The program of the League of Prizren included a territory much larger than Greater Albania. Btw after the capture of Shkup in 1912 that area was recognized as part of the Albanian millet--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 18:59, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
In relation to the "concept" of Greater Albania, envisioned by the League of Prizren: It's a very far fatched argument to link the Greater Albania concept of Mussolini with the League of Prizren unique vilayet concept, which was there to push for more territories for the Sultan. The link will not survive in the long run. --Sulmues (talk) 19:00, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Clarified better the League of Prizren aims as per Zjarri's concern.[1] --Sulmues (talk) 19:21, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
"And managed by Albanians" is simply terrible, not to mention ungrammatical bordering on unreadable. Athenean (talk) 20:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
It's difficult to put together concepts that have been actually written in Belgrade and Athens (the main contributor of this article seems to be user:Megistias). My difficulty of putting together League of Prizren with Benito Mussolini stems from twisted ideas of the Serbian nationalists as per Elsie. --Sulmues (talk) 20:32, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh the irony. So "Greater Albania" is a concept invented by Serbian nationalists to make the Albanians look bad now? I suppose there just aren't any Albanian nationalists out there who dream of "re-uniting" all the "Albanian" lands (Kosovo, Chameria, "Illirida", about half of Montenegro) into a single Albanian state. They must all be figments of the Serbian imagination. Sites like www.illyrians.com and organizations like the LRK must also be Serbian creations. Here's an idea: Why don't we change the first sentence of the lead to: "Greater Albania is a twisted idea of Serbian nationalists to make Albanians look bad." Athenean (talk) 20:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Per Elsie, the term was coined in Belgrade, that's just not me, you gotta talk to Robert. Half of Montenegro into an Albanian state? Where did you get that? If you keep this article in Wikipedia, the way it is, I bet you a lot of nationalists will gather, because they'll get the idea right from this article. --Sulmues (talk) 21:58, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Article gets even more pov

Seems the lead has became more pov after the recent edits, especially this: [[2]]...The concept of Greater Albania was coined by Benito Mussolini, when Fascist Italy reunited the Albanian inhabited territories, but the term itself is actually never used by the Albanians, and has been kept alive in recent years by Serbian nationanlist circles in order to justify a Greater Serbia. is typical wp:pov and obviously against wp:lead.Alexikoua (talk) 20:18, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Please read Robert Elsie and you will find those words there. --Sulmues (talk) 20:34, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

This [3] is even worse. "...and managed by Albanians". The irony is also delightful. Here we have Albanian editors who go out there and buy books for the sole purpose of trying to cram as many "Notable People" in places like Preveza to prove that it was Albanian, Albanian, and by the way, Albanian, and here we have the same editors trying to hedge "Greater Albania" as much as possible in a million different ways ("it was coined by Mussolini", "albanians never use the term", "Serbian propaganda", and it goes on). The lead has become a dreadful exercise in weasel-wording. Athenean (talk) 20:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Guys the League of Prizren has NOTHING to do with the concept of Greater Albania. If you insist with keeping League of Prizren here, that's what you're going to get. We have to get the League of Prizren out. --Sulmues (talk) 20:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC) And made some wording improvements. --Sulmues (talk) 20:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Better idea: Why don't you put the whole article up for deletion at AfD, since after all "Greater Albania" is nothing more than a figment of the Serbian imagination? Athenean (talk) 20:39, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I proposed it a while ago and I think you rejected the idea. I don't think it's going to go through, because I'd get all the Greeks and the Serbs together voting Keep. --Sulmues (talk) 20:41, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Rofl, I was actually being sarcastic. Anyway, the lead is simply terrible. There is so much hedging and weasel wording and poor English that is hopelessly messed up. Since discussion also appears quite hopeless, I will consider other dispute resolution methods. Athenean (talk) 20:45, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Saying that "Greater X" term, is never used by X citizens is really a weird claim. The way it is written on lead is completely misleading for the reader.Alexikoua (talk) 20:43, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree, but it wasn't me to start this article. I would rather move the article to "Ethnic Albania" and we can discuss this option. The concept has started as such by Mussolini in 1941, whereas the areas included within League of Prizren were much bigger and have nothing to do with it. --Sulmues (talk) 20:46, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Nope the English title is 'Greater Albania', apart from being bad translation from Albanian to English, 'Ethnic Albania' is also pov by the way.Alexikoua (talk) 20:51, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
The article Ethnic Albania existed and was eventually merged into Greater Albania by this edit. It is a different concept and I personally tend to have two articles. There was no consensus for such a move, but it was done back in 2007 by User:ColdFusion650. --Sulmues (talk) 20:58, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
"Ethnic", "Greater", whatever, it's the same thing. It's a concept to unite all Albanian lands into one entity, and this hasn't changed since the days of the League of Prizren, nor was this concept "invented" by Mussolini. Every Balkan nationality has similar concepts, I don't see what's so frightful or shameful about it. After all, you don't see Greek editors writing hysterically in Megali Idea that it is a Turkish concept invented to make Greeks look bad. Athenean (talk) 20:53, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
There is big difference the Megali Idea probably surpassed itself, whereas the Greater Albania was never realized. Of course the editors will have different feelings. Now you say that Megali Idea is a Turkish concept, whereas Greater Albania is Albanian? How come that Megali Idea, a Turkish idea realized in Greek lands, whereas Greater Albania, an "Albanian" concept never realized?--Sulmues (talk) 20:58, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

In addition: Greater Albania is completely different from Ethnic Albania. Greater Albania doesn't take into consideration the ethnicity of the populations included in the area, whereas Ethnic Albania starts with the idea of including all the ethnic Albanians. It is blatantly different. --Sulmues (talk) 21:09, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

"Megali Idea, a Turkish idea realized in Greek lands"? Man, I don't think you have any idea what we're talking about here. Your last point is so completely devoid of sense and meaning, that I am ending discussion here and will seek outside opinions. Athenean (talk) 21:23, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Feel free, but know that your sarcasm is not appreciated. --Sulmues (talk) 21:25, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm not being sarcastic. You just don't (or can't) understand a single word I'm saying. Athenean (talk) 21:29, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, just make up your mind about your sarcasm. This contradicts this. --Sulmues (talk) 21:53, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I meant my last point. But you really have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when you say Megali Idea was a Turkish concept. None whatsoever. Athenean (talk) 21:56, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I must have misread this edit, which seemed very strange to me too. Anyways, I think that we have to have two articles Ethnic Albania and Greater Albania, because there are no sources to state that the Albanian nationalists want "Greater Albania". The sources we have are for Albanian nationalists calling for Ethnic Albania, an article, which now doesn't exist and just redirects here. --Sulmues (talk) 22:01, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

athenean...sulmues doesnt seem to understand half of what you write you wrote 'you don't see Greek editors writing hysterically in Megali Idea that it is a Turkish concept invented to make Greeks look bad' and he understood that you meant that 'the MI WAS a turkish concept invented to make greeks look bad'...87.202.23.90 (talk) 02:00, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

BTW as i said in a section above im still not sure about the map that shows '20-50% albanian' in certain parts of south albania..it seems too low (and i have no idea about the albanian presence in certain areas of fyrom so ill let others express themselves here)...do we have any specific info?87.202.23.90 (talk) 02:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Reverted this problematic edit of Alexikoua. Please read the source and don't make any edits that are outside of what the source says, otherwise we are in OR territory. @IP editor: Please do not break wp:npa: I already told Athenean that I had not understood his comment on Megali Idea. --Sulmues (talk) 17:16, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
One more thing. Since Athenean brought the case to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Geopolitical_ethnic_and_religious_conflicts#Greater_Albania, I invite everybody that the current version [4], which is the same as the one right before he brought it to AN, be kept. --Sulmues (talk) 17:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I spotted this on the ethnic conflict board while perusing the Northern Ireland debate above it. FWIW, I think the insistence on saying that "Albanians rarely use the term" etc - while perhaps interesting as a matter of translation and linguistics - is kind of missing the point, and also confuses the concept itself and what it might be called locally, with how popular it might or might not be with Albanians. The term "Greater xx" is the phrase most often used by third party English language sources to describe the various irredentist aspirations of nation xx. It is used in respect of Albania just as it is in respect of Serbia, Croatia etc. The idea that either the concept or the precise term used to describe it in respect of Albania was simply invented by rival (Serbian) nationalists or Mussolini is a little odd. As a starting point for evidence against that, quick Google searches will reveal all sorts of books and media sources using the term regularly.
The point beyond that is that the "Greater xx" term can cover all sorts of aspirations - eg a claim on areas where there is an ethnic Albanian/Serbian/Croation majority today, and/or those areas that were historically part of some old empire etc. These differences can be explained in the article, rather than by having an "Ethnic Albania" fork. Equally, in some cases there is greater political support for the concept of an expanded nation than there is in others. It may well be the case that in Albania and among Albanians, the Greater Albania idea in its various guises is not popular. That too can be explained in the article. But it does not mean that the term/concept does not exist, or that its existence is some sort of propaganda device that needs to be exposed.
As for the Robert Elsie quote that's being put in the lead, yes it is from a seemingly decent source (I don't know much about him), but it remains simply the opinion/comment of one writer, which is being cherry-picked, unattributed, for fairly clear POV purposes as if it were fact, and the only fact. I'm not sure the lead should be using one quote to make such a definitive statement in the narrative voice of the article from the outset, particularly the second part of it. N-HH talk/edits 19:03, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Good points, and thanks for chiming in. The problem here is that some editors simply cannot see things outside their national perspective. While the term "Greater Albania" may have very specific connotations for Albanians, this article is simply about the general irredentist concept as treated in the English literature. Elsie's sentence can be moved to a separate section, where the issue about how Albanians perceive the term Greater Albania can be discussed. But it has no place in the lead. Similarly, the territories claimed on behalf of Greater Albania should be mentioned in the lead. Athenean (talk) 19:14, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I have no problems moving Elsie below. Good points. About the territories claimed on behalf of Greater Albania in the lead: that simply is far fetched, because that's where you'll encounter the Ethnic Albania issue: You gotta find the maps that the Albanian nationalists will bring. In addition, what about the League of Prizren? --Sulmues (talk) 19:25, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Are you serious? There is nothing far fetched about discussing which territories are claimed on behalf of Greater Albania, it is essential to helping our readers get a quick grasp of the subject (per WP:LEDE). Every map put out by Albanian irredentists shows Kosovo, all of Epirus, about half of the Republic of Macedonia, and a good chunk of Montenegro and Serbia (Sandjak). Just look up "Greater Albania" in Google Images or the Commons. In fact, most of the proposals for greater Albania follow the template set by the League of Prizren, which was the inception of the idea of uniting all "Albanian" lands. Athenean (talk) 19:36, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Exactly my point. Those maps come from Serbianna.com [5] and kosovo.net [6], Belgrade agencies [7], and in general the ultra-nationalistic Serbian sites. Find me Albanian nationalistic sites, 'cause I have never seen them. [8]. --Sulmues (talk) 20:00, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Right, you have never seen Albanian ultranationalist sites, therefore, they must not exist. All figments of the Serbian and Greek imaginations. For starters then, you might want to check out www.illyrians.org, one of my favorites. Note the banner on top. What does it say? Btw, the maps you claim are from "Serbian ultranationalist sites" are in Albanian, so they prboably got them from places like illyrians.com. At least one of them they took from the Commons (and antiwar.com is hardly a "Belgrade agency"). Now, on a more serious note, there are dozens upon dozens on sources on Greater Albania out there, and it can be very easily sourced which lands are claimed on behalf of Greater Albania [9]. Btw, I don't understand why you're so opposed to this. All "Greater X" articles include a brief description of the territories claimed, e.g. Greater Serbia and Megali Idea. I don't see why Greater Albania should be any different. It's just basic encyclopedism. Athenean (talk) 21:28, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm not opposing placing the territories claimed. I just think that:
  1. The League of Prizren link to Greater Albania should be handled with care, if it really needs to be presented in the article: I wouldn't at all, personally, because Albania didn't exist back then.
  2. The concept of Greater Albania was cristallized during Albania under Italy. --Sulmues (talk) 18:41, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Greater Albania was only ever realized under Italy. But the concept of an Albanian-ruled entity that would include Albania, Kosovo, Chameria, and others places, was first conceived by the League of Prizren. That is what this article is about, not the term "Greater Albania" in the narrow sense. Athenean (talk) 18:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes but I really disagree that the League of Prizren concept has anything to do with Greater Albania. This came after Albania's borders were unjustly decided in London in 1913.--Sulmues (talk) 20:22, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Elsie's sentence, the part about Mussolini is not really necessary, since there is a whole section (WW 2), discussing the use of "Greater Albania" by the Italians. The part about its uses in Serbian nationalism can go in the "Political Uses" section. Athenean (talk) 18:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Fine with me, but a mention of that should be done in the lede. --Sulmues (talk) 20:22, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, now that we have reached an agreement on the 1st paragraph, to work on the 2nd paragraph. The only problem I see is grammatical which I can easily fix by simply removing "and to be put". Athenean (talk) 19:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

 Done [10]. --Sulmues (talk) 20:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Now that the issue has finally been resolved, the tags should be removed as well. They're kind old (2007, 2008) and there is no real discussion about them anymore. Athenean (talk) 21:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Map

Undid this map removal [11], removed on spurious grounds. The map is not POV, it is sourced to Le Monde Diplomatique, a very reliable source. Athenean (talk) 07:30, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I've read through all past discussions about maps etc. and it seems that this isn't Le Monde and the creator of the map is allegedly citing Rexhep Qosja, who would never write anything similar to what the map proposes. Btw this is a content dispute so I'll add back the POV template. Per wp:fringe since no one else even proposes that the map has to go.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 07:35, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

This map is one of many, presented by several sources og high credibility. Just happened to see lately this[[12]]. (@Zjarri: you don't have to explain again how aware you are about all the past 2-years discussions in wikipedia).Alexikoua (talk) 08:10, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not explaining myself Alexikoua and bring a page link not list one. Btw because as I said you have already discussed this when Athenean recycles the use of that argument it is disruptive per WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT(that's the reason of my past discussions reference)--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 08:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

(unindent)That link btw shows Himarë as a region with no Greeks, also Berat County with no Greeks and also doesn't refer to whether the minority in all these lands is a majority--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 08:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Lede map

I have replaced the map in the lede, which showed the distribution of ethnic Albanians in neighboring countries, with an actual map of greater Albania. This is standard practice in other "Greater X" articles, e.g. Greater Serbia, Greater Croatia, etc. Since the lede describes which territories are claimed on behalf of GA, a map of GA is the most appropriate. The distribution map can go in the body of the article, or in other articles (when it is ready; it is currently the subject of a dispute in the commons), but not really in the lede here. Athenean (talk) 01:32, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Map of greater Albania (not accurate)

Why does the map include the island of Corfu where Albanians make for about 2% or less of the local population? Nor it is historically associated with the Albanian people. On what criteria the island and the part of the continental Greece is included ? Adrian (talk) 06:33, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

This map is horrible... first of all, I demand citation for a majority of Albanians wanting it. Kosovo, parts along Montenegro's southeast border and Western and Northern Macedonia, and finally Preshevo valley, yes... but it extends too far into Montenegro, and way too far into Macedonia and Serbia (it's supposed to be ONLY Preshevo!), and there are utterly no mainstream claims against Greece AT ALL. This map should be removed as soon as possible. --Yalens (talk) 16:56, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
The old map, that showed concentrations of Albanians in border countries... that was much, much better. --Yalens (talk) 16:58, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

"Unknown" number

Is this [13] some kind of joke? The number of Albanians in Greece is not "unknown", otherwise please enter "unknown" in the infobox of Albanians. Estimates exist, though they all regard post-1991 migrants, which have absolutely nothing to do with greater albania. It's as if some people are trying to imply that the large number of such migrants is a justification for Greater Albania. Nonsense. Athenean (talk) 18:32, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Further editing

Dismissing my whole contribution is not the correct step. I advise that you take it sentence by sentence and on the points you have reservation than you can raise them.I have not dismissed all the contributions of others It is clear that you have not paid attention as much. If you pay attention “large” relates to Yugoslavia and “lesser degree” to Greece. For Yugoslavia is used “rule”. For Greece is used “jurisdiction”. You can rewrite the sentences to make these clear.

There is an implication that the Republic of Albania is responsible for the secession of Kosovo. Please state evidence that Republic of Albania went to unilateral war with Yugoslavia and annexed Kosovo. Kosovo independence is not Greater Albania. It was not fought by the Albanian Army. The articles in Wikipedia are not about “ifs”, for example: “if Kosovo and Albania merge” then that amounts to Greater Albania. That is speculation--MJDANikhila (talk) 21:18, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I made some alternations because some of the info does not reflect the sources. Some of the alternations have to do with style.--MJDANikhila (talk) 17:51, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Source 1 (Bogdani, Mirela; John Loughlin)p 230 does not state that the term Ethnic Albania is used only by a section of Albanian population,i.e "Albanian nationalists".therefore i am editting the part that is not reflective of the source.--MJDANikhila (talk) 18:18, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Your heavy-handed alterations removed that Greater Albania includes a substantial portion of Greece (almost all of Epirus and parts of Western Macedonia, and even the island of Corfu), which is unacceptable. Also, the term "ethnic Albania" is only used by Albanian nationalists, and virtually no one else [14]. Moreover, the Bogdani source reflects that, I think the problem here is one of English comprehension. Athenean (talk) 19:20, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The point about Greek portion (Chameria). Yes, that is part of the Ethnic Albania. The Bogdani source does not reflect the following: "ethnic Albania is called only by Albanian nationalists". It says:...or as it is known by other names..Ethnic Albania. It does not claim that is exclusively used by a specific group(s). I have had a look at your contributions on other articles and you and your friend Alexikoua do demonstrate obsession and fanaticism.--MJDANikhila (talk) 14:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

@MJD: please relax and avoid irrelevant, nearly trolling, comments. In general when a specific user has a diferrent opinion on the subject this doesn't mean he is obsessed or fanatic. About the issue you claim, the source doesn't say that the irrendetism term (Greater/Ethnic Albania) concerns all member of the same ethnic group. Maybe you should make a more carefull research and present your results in the talkpage first (with full quotes if necessary).Alexikoua (talk) 15:46, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

@Alexikoua. I am relaxed, There are sections on wikipedia on fanaticism (Don't be a fanatic). Yep...i have had a look at your contributions and both you and Athenean display fanaticism....that aside i have read Bogdani and it says that: Greater Albania is known by other names like Ethnic Albania and Pan-Albanism. It does not say who uses this terms.The article as it stands is allocating the use of the term of "ethnic albania" to "Nationalist albanians". So is better avoided.i mean as to who uses the term as this can not be known for sure.Now...i will edit it in a way that the usage of the terms are referenced but not by who the terms are used as that is impossible to say.--MJDANikhila (talk) 15:34, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I reverted your changes because to say that Greater Albania were "conceived for the first time" in WW2 is incorrect and POV. It is also POV to describe parts of other countries as "Albanian lands". And as far as "ethnic Albania" goes, I have only ever seen Albanians use it. Can you show me a non-Albanian source that consistently refers to it as "ethnic" Albania? Athenean (talk) 17:04, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

1)As to when Greater Albania was conceived can be found on the very reference from Danilo Zolo. Invoking humanity: war, law, and global order.] Continuum International Publishing Group, 2002. ISBN 9780826456557, p. 24: "It was under the Italian and German occupation of 1939-1944 that the project of Greater Albania... was conceived." 2)The word conception and implementation should go together on 1939-1944 section. Your claim that my editing is INCORRECT is a POV in itself but not an issue i care to deal with for now. 3)In my editing I do not use the words "Albanian lands" but "Albanian inhabited territories" an this is not to describe other countries as Albanian but to state what Greater Albania means and what its proponents want to achieve. 4)My point about the term "Ethnic Albania" is that is not a wholly-owned term by an specific political group (i.e Alb nationalists).Unless by Alb nationalists you mean all Albanians? Please clarify! What is supported in Bogdani's book is the existence and usage of the term Ethnic Albania but not who uses it, whether it is main stream Albanian or nationalist Albanians or the Albanian state. Your point that the term Ethnic Albania is a registered trade mark exclusively used by Albanian Nationalists organisations is not supported by Bogdani citation. Also, being used only by albanians (according to you)then it should be written in alb as well like this: Greater Alb or Ethnic albania (Albanian: Shqiperia Etnike)as called by Albanians themselves is a .... you give me the impression that you own this article...do you?--MJDANikhila (talk) 21:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Redundant section

The section titled "Current status" is utterly misleading and redundant, as if the "plan" is currently set in motion and Albanians are supposedly working on somehow increasing their number to overcome the neighboring states that they live in or something. If no one objects I'll delete the whole section. Discussion is welcome and I'll wait around 2 days. Epicurus B. (Not my talk page) 19:34, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

The section doesn't deal with an official plan to create a G.Albania but with the albanization proccess in these areas, as well as various initiatives to emphasize on their (supposed or not) Albanian character. The concept of G.A. is today adopted by the majority of Albanians, thus a complete removal of this section won't be a good idea. I suggest to re write the specific section and change the title to something less pov.Alexikoua (talk) 20:15, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
I fail to see any "albanization" in the section, it merely deals with census statistics which are not relevant in any way to the subject and as such do not belong in an article about a G.Albania. Initiatives to emphasize Albanian character does not imply G.A. tendencies, it may merely imply that one is proud of his ethnicity. Whether G.A. is adopted by majority or not also does not affect it's so-called "current status". It is the right idea to delete the whole section and not return it until an army of Albanian separatists clearly say that they are fighting to potentially damage the territorial integrity of the neighboring countries. —Epicurus B. (Not my talk page) 20:50, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
I object deletion of this important section which serves to explain the current status of the concept.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
There is no current status of this concept because it is not in development and it is likely to stay so. Census statistics, which amounts for the majority of the section, is in no way in direct correlation with the progress of G.Albania and as such should be eliminated from the article. —Epicurus B. (Not my talk page) 15:26, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
The section is not about progress of GA concept but about its current status which is based on the present-day presence of people who currently declare their ethnicity as Albanian.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:07, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't favour the removal of the section as there is valid sourced information but I think it can be retitled. It is not fair to link Kosovan independence with a wider Albania entity as it wasn't accurate to refer to FR Yugoslavia, Krajina and Eastern BiH as Greater Serbia when all functioned independently. I would integrate the section's valid points within rest of article. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 19:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Agree with Evlekis. Wholesale removal is too drastic, but perhaps a change in the title is in order. Athenean (talk) 22:33, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Evlekis on integrating the valid points to the rest of the article however that renders the section superfluous and as such, up for deletion. Does everyone agree with this?—Epicurus B. (Not my talk page) 12:52, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Of course not. It is impossible to agree with something which is not precise enough. Will you please present the text you think should be deleted?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:22, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Since I think that the majority of it is unnecessary it would be impractical to present all of the text that I think should be deleted. As an alternative, for practicability's sake, I ask of you to present the text that you deem to be valid enough to stay in the article.—Epicurus B. (Not my talk page) 13:36, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

There are two sources for two separate pieces. I'd estimate it's about half encyclopaedic, half POV. For the time being, let's consider a change of heading. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 18:41, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Overview

For what it is worth, this is my analysis:

  1. The declaration of independence of Kosovo in 2008 could be interpreted as a degree of success in the creation of a Greater Albania (were such territory to be annexed to Albania or federated with the state)...
Not so. Pure conjecture whilst they are separate entities.
  1. although the United Nations (UN) has stated that if as a result Kosovo becomes independent, annexation by another state would not be possible.
Can of worms. First, core statement is not sourced, second, who needs to annex anything? In 1918, Serbia never annexed the State of Croats, Serbs and Slovenes nor vice-versa, they merged to become the Kingdom of SCS.
  1. In a survey carried out by United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and published in March 2007 only 2.5% of the Albanians in Kosovo thought unification with Albania is the best solution for Kosovo. 96% said they wanted Kosovo to become independent within its present borders. In 2012, as part of the celebrations for Albania's 100th anniversary of independence, Prime Minister Sali Berisha spoke of "Albanian lands" stretching from Preveza in Greece to Presevo in Serbia, and from the Macedonian capital of Skopje to the Montenegrin capital of Podgorica, angering Albania's neighbors. The comments were also inscribed on a parchment that will be displayed at a museum in the city of Vlore, where the country’s independence from the Ottoman Empire was declared in 1912.
This part seems all right and there are two sources. But by itself, it doesn't warrant a "current status" header. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 18:49, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
I agree, we could include the Berisha statement in the "Political uses of the concept" section and the UNDP survey in the lead.—Epicurus B. (Not my talk page) 13:16, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
The Berisha section down to the end of the passage can go into "Political uses of the concept" as you say - the previous part can be adjoined to lede with a mild outtake from first lines, just acknowledging Kosovo's wide recognition as independent. You need that just to introduce the part about popular views on the concept. I don't mean calling it "a success" in GA creation. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 15:10, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

I took the liberty and made the changes, Berisha's statement was put in the "Political uses of the concept" and the UNDP survey in the lead. —Epicurus B. (Not my talk page) 16:16, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

The table and description of the territories claimed on behalf of greater Albania is information that is useful to our readers. You do not have consensus to gut the article. Athenean (talk) 16:33, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
I kept your textual changes, but I re-instated the table and description of territories claimed, with a suitably renamed section title. Athenean (talk) 16:41, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
The new section title is NPOV and suitable for the text that follows, I agree to this and consider this matter closed.—Epicurus B. (Not my talk page) 16:53, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
I must admit, I was only working on the text and not the table. Obviously the table provides useful information on the regions and the main cities (capitals) along with population. I forgot that the section we were discussing led to that detail, but as long as we are all agreed it remains in one place on the article, then I believe this matter has been resolved successfully and with consensus. Thanks all. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 19:06, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Serbia

The Albanian demands are not just for the territories annotated in the article. Not just Presevo Valley is claimed by the Albanian nationalists, but also Sandzak, Kursumlija, Toplica up to Nis. Anyone would find any more evidence of this? Almost all maps of Greater Albania, on Google images, have large chunk of Serbia proper that Albanian nationalists claim as part of Greater Albania.

Territories claimed

I'm not a fan of the table in this section; it seems to be mostly original research. For example, why is "Old Skopje" the "capital" of the Albanian Macedonian claimed territory, as opposed to Tetovo? What are the exact boundaries of the claimed territories? Where did the 60% figure come from in the Macedonia entry? The table should probably just be removed. --Local hero talk 22:25, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

The exact borders of Ethnic Albania are those in which lives an authocton Albanian population. 2/3 of Albanian territories were given to its neighbours in the conference of London in 1913, and that was the price to pay, in the great powers eyes, to appease the hunger for land (especially Albanian) of the Balkan states. Albania was simply too weak to prevent this or to lead any kind of opposition, so it had to be sacrificed. The concept "Greater Albania" is a Serbian propagandistic expression to cover the rightful Albanian request of having its land back with some kind of colonialistic or agressive plan of conquest. It's like accusing someone who's been robbed of greed just because he wants its stolen staff back!!! This of course is ridiculous as it betrays the exact Serbian policy and mentality towards these issues. There has been a Serbian "Naçertanja" and a Greek "Megali idea" plan but the concept "Greater Albania" was an Italian comeup to justify the fascist invasion of Ballkan countries, which the Serbian and Greek propaganda machine exploited, and continue to exploit in order the justify their theft of Albanian land!! Etimo (talk) 15:47, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

That's just dandy but I was actually looking for a reliable source on the boundaries of the conceptual Greater Albania and the 'capitals' of the individual regions. --Local hero talk 22:15, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't think the table should be removed. It should be corrected to make it more informative and better referenced. I propose to:
  1. remove the main city column
  2. current states should be placed in the first column because it is obviously the main criterion for division of the territories of GA
  3. add citations which support each assertion in the table.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 06:33, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
If those fixes can be made, then I'm also fine with keeping the table. --Local hero talk 22:20, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

The generally accepted map of ethnic Albania is the one already in the article, I think it's better for the moment to stick to it cause I don't think you can find THE SOURCE for that, because the claims are different, depending on the inhabitants of a certain region. This is also a further proof of the lack of an organized movement the aim of which is the "reconquest" of stolen land. Again, there is no such concept as "Greater or Great Albania" in the Albanian mentality, but only "Ethnic Albania", which, considering that 2/3 of Albanians live under the rule of foreign (mostly hostile) governments makes it fairly easy to understand!Etimo (talk) 13:42, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

One could draw a map based on the accounts of Ami Boue, the British analyst E.Spencer, the Austrian Albanologist J.Hahn and F. Pouqueville, all of them have traveled through Albania and Greece and further northwards in the 19th century and have given detailed descriptions of ethnic composition and borders of Balkan populations of that time. But still, I don't believe there are any well defined borders, that's what makes the Ballkan what it is!!Etimo (talk) 13:59, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Image

This image in commons is in English and can be used. This is the source. Even Serbian media use it. --XXXPPPXXX (talk) 07:25, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Agree.Lindi29 (talk) 14:54, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Am I just supposed to assume that you are each separate people? Anyhow, the image used in Serbian media reporting on the incident during a soccer game is from Wikipedia. It clearly states that on the image in the article. It is, therefore, not a valid source. As for the book reference, I can't confirm it's in there since no preview or web version is available. --Local hero talk 15:06, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
The specific map is virtually useless, we have a number of more detailed ones about the very same subject.Alexikoua (talk) 18:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Actually your map is uselees here Alexikoua.This article is about Greater Albania and not about the presence of Albanians in the neighbour countries.Rolandi+ (talk) 13:05, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

(ignore trolling) There is no map in the current article created by me.Alexikoua (talk) 13:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

But there is a map defended by you. Rolandi+ (talk) 13:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

The specific map concerns the regions that are claimed as parts of G. Albania by irredentist cycles. Thus I wouldn't agree that it's useless.

By the way it was created by Albanian users.Alexikoua (talk) 19:00, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

And what does it mean?There is no problem that it is created my Albanian users.This article is about Grater Albania,not about the presence of Albanians in the neighbour countries.Rolandi+ (talk) 12:08, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

The map offers additional info about the regions under this concept. You may be eager to see a map that paints everything in red, but additionally info about the percentage of Albanians on each administrative region is also essential to understand the concept. To sum up: we have a map that shows both G. Albanian and % of Albanian populations, not only G. Albania.Alexikoua (talk) 12:44, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

The map at this article isn't the same with the map of Greater Albania.Just see the part of Serbia and Greece(greek macedonia and corfu).Firstly you said that the map was created by albanian users.Now you claim that these two maps are the same.Strange enough.What 's the problem with the red coluor?Albanian symbols are in black and red.Rolandi+ (talk) 14:03, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

If you don't have anything else against it,the map will be changed.Rolandi+ (talk) 09:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

You need to support with reliable reference that these are the real borders proposed for a G.Albania.Alexikoua (talk) 12:00, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Persistent removal

I wonder what's the meaning of this edit summary: [[15]], especially when the image is well sourced in commons [[16]]. Not to mention that this image was the product of a long established consensus among editors.Alexikoua (talk) 12:14, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Well I can only assume this is just a part of childish editting [[17]] or the editor doesn't understand English at all.Alexikoua (talk) 13:27, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Greater Albania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:00, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Change the tittle

Its Called ETHNIC ALBANIA not Greater Albania!!

This person is correct. Shqiperia Etnike translate directly to Ethnic Albania. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.19.29.107 (talk) 18:21, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Greater Albania

The content that was posted by 86.19.29.107 was not reliable.... The link he used was from a nationalistic writer. The official source is http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1199(1998) Please if you have to do an edit use reliable sources, I am not somekind of a patriot, if you have Facts that I am an Alien... post them

The edit you try to revert doesn't contain an official LINK, so if you have to discuss something...here is the place 

Sincerely yours
  ACEDIA --ACEDIA (talk) 16:36, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Table in "Areas" section

For an unexplained reason the data about Albania cites the 2011 census, but this census counted 2,312,356 ethnic Albanians. I assume that the number should be replaxed with the correct one per citation (although I suggest to use a more decent estimation).Alexikoua (talk) 14:05, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Consensus map restored

I appears that this map (a product of consensus among several editors) was removed without reason. It's sad that such collective works disappears without the slightest explanation.Alexikoua (talk) 17:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Greater Albania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:14, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Greater Albania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:07, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Greater Albania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:32, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Greater_Albania/Archive_2&oldid=1146459503"