Talk:Kararname (League of Prizren)

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

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:45, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kararname → Kararname (League of Prizren) – kararname is a ｃommon noun.relisting Andrewa (talk) 06:55, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Takabeg (talk) 14:15, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's clear that Kararname of the League of Prizren is not only famous Kararname in historiography in English language.

Some samples:

David McDowall, A modern history of the Kurds, p. 430.

Robert W. Olson, The Kurdish nationalist movement in the 1990s: its impact on Turkey and the Middle East, p. 180.

Dimitri Constas, The Greek-Turkish conflict in the 1990s:domestic and external influences, p. 71.

Erhard Franz, Population policy in Turkey: Family planning and migration between 1960 and 1992, p. 150.

Takabeg (talk) 05:50, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I am creator of this article and its main contributor. It is very good to have users like you Takabeg who are very active in editing articles dealing with Ottoman Empire. Thank you for links leading to sources which explain that Kararname is in fact decree on Turkish (?) and that there were a lot of other important decrees during OE. I think that before we rename this article we should create disambiguation page with short explanation of the meaning of Kararname word and links to few important Kararnames like this of Prizren league?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:05, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question - does Wikipedia have articles on any other topics that are called "Kararname"? If not, I don't see the need for disambiguation in parentheses. -GTBacchus(talk) 18:11, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Answer - Wikipedia does not have articles on any other topics that are called "Kararname". Still, I am afraid that we could mislead the readers about the real meaning of the word. Since I am the creator of the article, I undertake obligation to create new articles on other topics that are called Kararname till the end of August. Then we will have clear situation. I propose to wait till the end of August before final decision about this request, if now there is no consensus for changing the name of the article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:21, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that's an excellent offer, and I don't mind waiting a little while. Thank you. -GTBacchus(talk) 22:43, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
* Kararname of 1296 was created. - Takabeg (talk) 06:18, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting.... there seems no case for a move, but there might be if articles on other kararnameler are created. I'm skeptical, but let's wait and see. Andrewa (talk) 06:58, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Move it; "Kararname" is not an uncommon term in Ottoman history and there are many other potential articles about notable kararnames which could be written (and I'd like to start on some). Right now, Kararname of 1296 has a link here even though the two are wholly unrelated. We don't put Bush–Blair 2003 Iraq memo at Memorandum, we don't put Treaty of Tordesillas at Treaty, so why do we put one particular 1878 kararname at Kararname? It does a great disservice to readers. bobrayner (talk) 18:15, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question. Seems fairly clear (to me, at least) that the consensus emerging is that the article should be moved. But if it is moved, what should be done with Kararname? Should it be turned in a disambiguation page? Should it be a redirect to Kararname (League of Prizren)? Or should it become a broad-concept article? Jenks24 (talk) 19:55, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • In the longer term (when more content is built) either a disambig or a broad-concept article would be fine with me, although I think that future editing is likely to concentrate on individual historically-significant documents rather than on the general concept of a kararname, so a disambig is a more likely outcome. bobrayner (talk) 20:11, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • A further thought: It's been said that redlinks stimulate new content creation. I could cheerfully create a disambig with initial content of one bluelink (for the article at hand) and a dozen other redlinks, and let nature take its course... bobrayner (talk) 20:14, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think that is a good idea Bobrayner.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:17, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK. If nobody has any objections, I'll write a short list, and create a disambig tomorrow. bobrayner (talk) 08:28, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A step forward[edit]

bobrayner (talk) 22:22, 24 August 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.


Source misrepresentation[edit]

If this was an only-Muslim event, then why do Antid.'s sources mention Pashko Vasa(a Catholic) as its author[1]? The article's wording is very pointy too.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 09:12, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Read the referenced source, page 81. Please remove tags you added.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:20, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sami Frasheri(a Muslim), Jani Vreto(an Orthodox Christian), Eftim Brandi(also an Orthodox Christian) i.e source misrepresentation.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 09:27, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read the source of the lead? In the list of the signatories it also says The representative of the Catholic population of Prizren among others.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 09:30, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is there going to be a reply or at least an admission regarding the sources?--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was busy answering your other question. I wish you would answer my questions within 30 minutes after I post them. On the page num 81 is written: Pashko Vasa.... participated in the organization of the League of Prizren in 1878. That is why I mention him. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is not the only time you accused me for source misinterpretation and provided no arguments for your accusation. Please don't do that in future.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:12, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't WP:IDHT as my queries were specific and concise and there's no response regarding them.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I already quoted the source which explains involvement of Pashko Vasa. The text of the article does not say that Pashko Vasa was author, but that it was him who proposed "simply the unification of all Albanian speaking territory within one vilayet". Therefore it is obvious that there is no misinterpretation.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Title[edit]

The title is attested as kararname only 9 times(4 of which are Elsie books)[2], while memorandum has 77 results[3]. That being said any move to Memorandum of the League of Prizren should be considered uncontroversial.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 09:18, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You should not move this page without gaining the consensus first. You did not respect the consensus about the new name of the article, reached on this page. Please undo your action and follow the renaming procedure.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:22, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, when there is such a discrepancy regarding the use of terms I don't think that any user should start move discussions.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 09:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Read this source. Memorandum and Kararname are probably different thigs. Please respect consensus about the name of this article which is reached on this page. Please do not perform major changes to the article before gaining consensus on the talk page first. Let us deal with memorandum vs. kararname here on the talk page first, and then change the article after consensus is reached.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:34, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The one attested as a memorandum(sent to Benjamin Disraeli) is the one you've titled as a kararname, so regardless of the number of resolutions this subject is attested as a memorandum.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 09:37, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If it was not kararname which was sent to Disraeli, but another memorandum, then we should not rename the article but provide suitable explanation in the article. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:53, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
13 June: The League of Prizren submits an eighteen- page memorandum to Benjami Disraeli i.e this subject is attested as a memorandum.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 09:58, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is article about decree of League. Therefore the article is named Kararname (decree).--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Memorandum of the League of Prizren ?[edit]

August 2011 (UTC)


Requested move II[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:40, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kararname (League of Prizren) → Memorandum of the League of Prizren – or Memorandum (League of Prizren) – The subject is attested as kararname only 9 times(4 of which are Elsie books)[4], while memorandum has 46 results[5] — ZjarriRrethues — talk 09:50, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: The title was newly changed with consensus. I'll research again for the next time. Thank you. Takabeg (talk) 09:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A title being newly changed isn't a reason for opposing a requested move. Is there a specific argument that leads you to oppose this request?--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is article about Kararname (decree) of the League. Memorandum is different document which was sent to the Disraeli 5 days before Kararname were composed, according to these sources. This issue should be properly explained in the article. Therefore I propose to ZjarriRrethues to cancel this renaming request. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:04, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly oppose: per determining of Antidiskriminator. Takabeg (talk) 10:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Antid. if these two events are unrelated then why did you label this article as the signed by 47 Muslim deputies of the Prizren Committee for National Defence on June 10, 1878 in Prizren, Kosovo Vilayet, Ottoman Empire, and submitted to Benjamin Disraeli, the British representative at the Congress of Berlin, on June 13, 1878? (source misrepresentation)--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I made mistake. I am not the only author of this article but I admit that it was me who introduced word memorandum into this article. It is not forbidden to make mistake. What is forbidden is to disrespect the consensus, to accuse other users without providing proof for accusations and to perform significant changes to the article before reaching consensus first. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:16, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll research for the next time in detail. I keep strongly oppose. Because, at least "Kararname" is not wrong and I know common sence and etiquette. Takabeg (talk) 10:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Source misrepresentation 2[edit]

Its programme primarily was based on Muslim solidarity, but soon shifted towards a well-clarified political action and open war with the Sublime Porte., which was cited as The initial position of the league which resulted with the text of the Kararname was based on the religious Muslim solidarity of the landlords and the people connected with the Ottoman administration and the religious authorities., however the source doesn't relate these resolutions with any position of the League of Prizren. --— ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The initial position of the league" is written in Kararname.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:17, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
From which source is that being quoted I found it and changed some parts based on the two sources.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:42, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am glad that we clarified that there was no misinterpretation of the source. Please be more careful in future and discuss the issue before adding word "misinterpretation" in three section titles on the talk page.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:08, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source misrepresentation 3[edit]

The memorandum served to promote a new agenda of Albanian National Awakening composed by Abdyl Frashëri on a key assembly of landowners at the Bektashi monastery of his native village of Frashër, and adopted by League of Prizren on November 27, 1878.[8] It was not an appeal for Albanian independence, or even autonomy within Ottoman Empire but, as proposed by Pashko Vasa, simply the unification of all Albanian speaking territory within one vilayet. Pashko Vasa isn't related by the source with any event in Frashër i.e source misrepresentation(the sentence will be removed).--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Pashko Vasa isn't related by the text of the article with any event in Frasher, but with proposal for unification of all Albanian speaking territory within one vilayet. This is another false accusation. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Then why have you written Kararname served to promote a new agenda of Albanian National Awakening composed by Abdyl Frashëri on a key assembly of landowners at the Bektashi monastery of his native village of Frashër, and adopted by League of Prizren on November 27, 1878.[8] It was not an appeal for Albanian independence, or even autonomy within Ottoman Empire but, as proposed by Pashko Vasa, simply the unification of all Albanian speaking territory within one vilayet.? None of the events mentioned in that section are related to each other and there's the source misrepresentation about the promotion of a new agenda, which the source doesn't relate at all with this subject.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:29, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Btw the source doesn't say that the resolution served as basis to promote a new agenda but that After this historic meeting, which served to promote the national awakening, Abdyl bey Frashëri returned to southern Albania where he organized.. refering to On 10 June 1878, delegates from all over Albania assembled in Prizren to work out a common political platform i.e source misrepresentation.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:23, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


As long as I understand, there were (at least) two memorundum.

  • 13 June: The League of Prizren submits an 18-page memorandum to Benjamin Disraeli. (Historical Dictionary of Kosovo, p. xxxii.)
  • another group of Albanians living in Istanbul drafted (on June 23, 1878) a memorandum (Viorica Moisuc, Ion Calafeteanu Assertion of unitary, independent national states in Central and Southeast Europe (1821-1923), p. 177.)
  • 18 June: Forty-five beys attending the League of Prizren pass and sign the Kararname" (Historical Dictionary of Kosovo, p. xxxii.)

Takabeg (talk) 10:31, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to this source it looks like memorandum submited to Disraeli was written by Pashko Vasa (who participated in organization of Prizren League) and submited to Disraeli as League's memorandum.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not commenting on that, but on the fact that the text of the section is:

Kararname served to promote a new agenda of Albanian National Awakening composed by Abdyl Frashëri on a key assembly of landowners at the Bektashi monastery of his native village of Frashër, and adopted by League of Prizren on November 27, 1878.[8] It was not an appeal for Albanian independence, or even autonomy within Ottoman Empire but, as proposed by Pashko Vasa, simply the unification of all Albanian speaking territory within one vilayet However:

  • The source doesn't relate that to any resolution/memorandum etc. but After this historic meeting, which served to promote the national awakening, Abdyl bey Frashëri returned to southern Albania where he organized.. refering toOn 10 June 1878, delegates from all over Albania assembled in Prizren to work out a common political platform
  • Pashko Vasa is also not related to anything in that section, the wording of which implies that he was connected to the Frashër

event,

(edit conflict)You are free to propose reworded text. I will AGF in your case and forget that you accuse me for plagiarism and close paraphrasing when I followed the wording of the source more closely. Now, when I reworded it you accused me for source misinterpretation. There is no misinterpretation here, the reworded phrase I used (new agenda) is not much different than term used in the source and does not give any different or significantly different meaning.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:46, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If this was an article about the meeting, then it'd be very relevant section. However, the kararname doesn't represent the meeting as it was rejected with the adoption of Frasheri's views [6]--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:56, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am glad that we clarified that there is no misinterpretation of the source. I don't agree with you. This article is about decree written on the meeting. It is impossible to explain decree without explanation of the meeting and its purpose. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have enough information about Memorandum dated 13 June 1878 ? If you (we) have, we can create Memorundum (13 June 1878) (an eighteen-page memorandum to Benjamin Disraeli), besides this article: Resolutions (Kararname) of the Prizren Committee for National Defence (signed by 47 Muslim deputies from the districts of Prizren, Gjakova, Ipek [Peja], Gucia, Yeni Pazar [Novi Pazar], Sjenica, Tashlidja [Plevlja], Mitrovica, Vuçitërn [Vushtrria], Prishtina, Gjilan, Skopje, Kalkandelen [Tetova], Kirchova [Kërçova / Kičevo], Gostivar, and Lower and Upper Dibra). -- Takabeg (talk) 11:13, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not now. If you look at the article you will find a link to wikisource and the text of Kararname. I did not find any detailed information about that memorandum except that it was submitted. I did not even realize it was separate document but thought that sources made mistakes with dates and length of the same document (Kararname - Memorandum). After I was involved in Kararname renaming discussions and making an article about Ali Kararname I know that Kararname (decree) is different than memorandum. I agree with you that memorandum does deserve separate article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Memorandum consisted of 18 pages. Kararname (regulation, decision etc.) was much shorter. And there was "Instructions (Talimat) from the Albanian League on the organization of the administration and the creation of its army. The League assumes the functions of a government." Not easy :)) Takabeg (talk) 11:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ottoman Empire's Balkan history is probably the most complicated of all. But also the most interesting.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:35, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's not complicated, but not well documented. Fortunately in the 2007 version of the History of the Albanian People the subject has been well documented. The Kararname was signed on June 17 and on the same day another document was signed, a Talimat, which negated the religious aspects of Kararname. The memoranda/petitions are unrelated with these two documents.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 11:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, it is not well documented but it is also very complicated. Taking in consideration that there are sources which are specific about June 18, please don't change the date to June 17 until this issue is properly discussed on the talk page.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:57, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just to illustrate the complexity of the Ottoman Balkan history: Concomitantly with the actions of the league of Prizren, another group of Albanians living in Istanbul drafted (on June 23, 1878) a memorandum which they forwarded to the foreign minister of Austria-Hungary.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

45 ?, 47 ?, 50 ?[edit]

According to Robert Elsie's book, 45 deputies signed kararname. But according to Robert Elsie's website, [7] 47, and we can see 50 deputies in his list (Wikisource). At least one deputy for Catholic population was detected in same list. Takabeg (talk) 13:17, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of your numerous very good observations Takabeg. Please pay attention to the final sentence: "The original Ottoman Turkish version is missing." Although Austria-Hungary and its diplomat ("Austro-Hungarian consul") were far from being neutral in all this events maybe we should follow that version (50 deputies) because it is probably closest to original of all presented versions. Still other numbers could be mentioned in brackets.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with the article title[edit]

The current article title is an improvement, but the problem isn't completely solved yet. "Kararname" is just a word for a government decree. There have been lots of them. We don't have an article called Conference (Yalta), we don't have an article called Treaty (Tordesillas), we don't have an article called Proclamation (Emancipation), so why do we put one particular kararname at "Kararname (League of Prizren)"? No source uses such silly parenthetical suffixes. bobrayner (talk) 16:17, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kararname (League of Prizren). 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) 09:12, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kararname (League of Prizren). 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) 06:28, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kararname_(League_of_Prizren)&oldid=1203202991"