Europe Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

First of all we should remove or improve all the information that is biased and not verified. So we could make a proper cleanup it is important to set the order of things. 1. The language used is very biased and shows a really non-neutral attitude. 2. Issues like Illyrian-Albanian continuance are unresolved and should be treated as such. 3. English used does not fulfill Wikipedia standards. Punctuation problems should be treated as well. 4. Usage of only 3-4 sources, most of them biased. AnnaFabiano (talk) 16:33, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• 1.Language refers to what the Albanian claims are
• 2.The issues are as Albanian nationalism forged them to be
• 3.grammar should be fixed
• 4.Sources are not biased- Albanian nationalism is.

Megistias (talk) 16:54, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"These ideologies and Greater Albania have proponents that are not only nationalists but criminals[5] and terrorists[6] involved in drug trafficking ,Human trafficking and other activities motivated by profit [7]." — Come on! If this is not anti-Albanian than I don't know what is. I would not be surprised if it would write "All Albanians are pigs, and they should all burn in hell![13]"... AnnaFabiano (talk) 20:32, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(And I know, i know... it's "chauvinism"!) AnnaFabiano (talk) 20:34, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is from the References.This thing you write is "All Albanians are pigs, and they should all burn in hell" is very bad.This article refers to Nationalists not something else, the Albanian people is hardworking and i have lots of them as friends.Megistias (talk) 20:47, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This text should by modified!. I found a lot of irreguralities:

1. They are citing the USA Gov. and I saw the list, there is no KLA in the list of terrorist organisations. See!
2. Additionally, the article about the KLA smugglers can hardly be considered as an argument since it is published in an activism web-site (highly biased) by an author whose achievements include marrying a Senior Air Attaché.
3. Also, there is no central nacionalistic claim, there is no official (or non-official for that matter) book or document that shows Albanian chauvinistic/nacionalistic claims.
4. Grammar should be definitively fixed.
5. Albanian nationalism is as any other!

Furthermore, it is superbly fallacious to call an entire nation criminals and terrorists. AnnaFabiano (talk) 21:42, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The KLA is disbanded now and my Source stands firm.The article is full of reliable references, if you are not here to contribute go somewhere else.Megistias (talk) 21:49, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, I will have to report you! AnnaFabiano (talk) 21:57, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Third Opinion

I have come here in response to a request for a third opinion. I am familiar with the issue in a general way and have no interests that would bias me one way or another on this topic. In looking at the article, I agree that it is a mess, but I think I can best help by guiding the disputing editors into turning it into an encyclopedic article if you are interested in working with me on that.

I would recommend that an introductory section be added. This lead section should consist of one or two paragraphs (three at most) that provide a concise overview of the subject. For this article, it should contain an NPOV description of the topic in the form of "…Pan-Albanianism is a nationalist Albanian ideology that advocates …" and provide a short list of its main tenets. This should be followed by a brief statement of its historical origins – the ideologies, not of Albanian ethnic origins – and a short statement of its significance, which here would need to mention(its strength and impact on Albanians living inside and outside the modern-day nation of Albania, as well as its significance and potential impact on neighboring states.

I would also like to see a source that addresses whether or not all three bold-face terms are synonymous. To wit, it is possible that there is a generic state-oriented nationalism oriented toward the modern state of Albania distinct from – and perhaps opposed to – a pan-Albanian nationalism advocating the achievement of a Greater Albania.

I think that if the two of you editors (and any others who may come to assist) can develop a neutral, encyclopedic-voiced lead, that will provide good guidance for structuring and developing the remainder of the article. Askari Mark (Talk) 23:50, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I asked an admin to help tidy the article before Anna came.-Report me on what?I dont use only 3-4 sources as you write and they are not biased Anna.You are not helping.Megistias (talk) 23:59, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you put it in some order Askari Mark?Megistias (talk) 00:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also take sometime to put Anna in her place, i dont enjoy been accused of things i dont write or have anything to do with like she writes of.Megistias (talk) 00:04, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since i already answered on Kla and that whole part is full of references this is Harrasment Anna.Keep away.Megistias (talk) 00:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About these KLA references. I think you should remove your thirteenth source "The Crimes of the KLA: Who Will Pay?" because it clearly violates Wikipedia's standards on reliable sources. Apart from being cited incorrectly (the link directs you to antiwar.com, not to Agence - France Presse as cited in the reference), it also belongs to the category of self-published sources. This way, the author is no established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications (as is required by Wikipedia). As a matter of fact, she's a mere career military officer's wife, which is pretty useless, if you are to cite her as a reliable reference for an encyclopedia article. Nightphilips (talk) 14:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ReplacedMegistias (talk) 14:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Magistias, references are not bricks that you can replace and use whenever you want. You should not write a text and then find sources that fit you best. It is the total opposite. You should create an article from non-biased sources, or from both sides. In this article there are sources telling only one side of the story. This text is totally offensive toward Albanians. AnnaFabiano (talk) 14:27, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping us Askari Mark. I personally think that Albanianism should be a separate page as it represents Albanian attitude towards religion. And I fully agree with you on issues brought forward on the structure of the article. And sorry Magistias if you feel accused of anything, it's just that I want so badly to fix these problems with POV. AnnaFabiano (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You write lies in all the page.My sources were not 3-4 and all the rest you say here are completely rejectable and clearly offensive towards my person.Keep your fantasies to yourself.Megistias (talk) 00:32, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Albanian attitude towards religion".Albanianism is nationalism clear and simple.Nationalism is just that.Megistias (talk) 00:33, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Third opinion" is not a "reporting" process, but rather a first step at arbitrating differences between editors. Accordingly, let's put the personal attacks behind us, and assume good faith. It is very easy online to assume what someone else means or intends – and to assume wrongly, so let's take a fresh start, shall we? Please concentrate on civilly critiquing suggestions and not persons or their motives.

I have just gone through the article and made a general clean-up of punctuation in order to enhance its readability. Since AnnaFabiano points out that the three terms – Albanian nationalism, Albanianism, and Pan-Albanianism might not be synonymous. Can either of you provide reliable sources that describe each term (or state that any two are synonymous)? Likewise, a source that better explains "Albanianism" as a 'religion' (in this instance a state religion) is required. Since I do not have access to the sources listed in the reference section, I will have to ask you to post the relevant text here so that we can all see it. Thanks, Askari Mark (Talk) 00:53, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a source on Albanianism that I found (there are more). I do not claim that Albanianism is a religious belief among Albanians, but rather an important factor on their religious tolerance. It was first coined by Pashko Vasa, and has a national importance because it calls for unity on a national scale without considering religion. However, it was only in this religious (or rather non-religious) form that it was ever used by Albanian authors. If there is any material that shows another form of usage of Albanianism, it would be helpful to post it. AnnaFabiano (talk) 01:27, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that is an interesting read and I now understand better what you were referring to. The discussions in this source point out some essential elements and themes that will need to be better brought out in this article. Askari Mark (Talk) 05:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are trying to mislead Anna, in this day and age Albanianism is Albanian nationalism and their only "religion"Megistias (talk) 08:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pan-Albanianism would be better suited to be part of the Big Albania article. It is essential not to confuse Albanian nationalism as country's identity revival, with Pan-Albanianism as nationalist claims. Also, there is a page that would be very well appropriated with Albanian nationalism: Albanian nationalism and independence. And maybe it would be better to create a whole new article on Albanianism and religious tolerance (or it could be part of Religion in Albania - although Albanianism refers to religious ambiguousness among Albanians, and not just Albania). What do you think? AnnaFabiano (talk) 10:53, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stop trying to confuse and mislead.Panalbanianism belongs here as well as all the rest as all are referenced.Nothing else will be created your are merely harassing now.Pretending not to be able to read or understand the references is just that.Megistias (talk) 10:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Megistias, please stop accusing AnnaFabiano of lies and deception. Neither you nor anyone else is in a position to know her motivations, so please assume they are meant well. Attacking other editors' motives is disruptive and unhelpful. I asked whether the three terms highlighted as synonymous in the lead of this article are truly and completely synonymous. If this is indeed the case, then I am sure that with your mastery of the literature, you can identify the sources that say so. Anna has offered her view and relevant, reliable source, so now it is your turn. (Remember, I am trying to mediate this dispute, not dictate solutions.) Askari Mark (Talk) 19:38, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it would be best if we could start something like:
Albanian nationalism or Albanianism or Pan-Albanianism refers to a group of Albanian ideologies and theories that culminated during Communist Albania, its continuation into modern Albania, and its proliferation in Kosovo. This should be stated later on the text: Albanian nationalist ideology and historical revisionism mixes Illyrians with Ancient Greeks and Pelasgians. This is obscure: These ideologies and Greater Albania have proponents that are not only nationalists but criminals[9] and terrorists[10] involved[11] in drug trafficking, human trafficking and other activities motivated by profit. It could go more like: Albanian nationalism in post-communist Albania is mostly present in war-engaged and criminal circles (otherwise you mark an entire nation as terrorist and criminal).
What do you say, Magistias (and anybody else)? AnnaFabiano (talk) 00:46, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Anna. Would you please provide a reliable source for that? It is useful if we can cite such a fact (although we can debate later whether it belongs in the lead). Please keep in mind that we must verify what we write by citing sources; if we cannot find a source that does so, then it should not be in this article until we can provide one. Askari Mark (Talk) 00:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, ok Askari, I was just rephrasing what was previously written - using the same citation. But maybe it is better to rewrite the entire text. I will have to work on that, BBS. AnnaFabiano (talk) 01:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not state that an entire nation is criminal Anna.

• "Albanian nationalism in post-communist Albania is mostly present in war-engaged and criminal circles (otherwise you mark an *entire nation as terrorist and criminal"

This is inappropriate,not a fact and your plain imagination.Megistias (talk) 08:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to rewrite this sentence because it is badly written and unclear: "These ideologies and Greater Albania have proponents and patrons that are not only nationalists but criminals[9] and terrorists[10] involved[11] in drug trafficking, human trafficking and other activities motivated by profit [12]". What does drug and human trafficking have to do with nationalism? I thought you were trying to say that Albanian nationalism is more present among Albanian drug and human trafficking criminals. Isn't that what you were trying to say? AnnaFabiano (talk) 11:07, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some copy-editing is needed. I'll carefully look the references on that sentence, seems they wanna say something more concrete.Alexikoua (talk) 13:09, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting involved Alexikoua. Other than being unclear, this text has a number of misleading references. For instance KLA is not considered a terrorist organisation bu the US State Dep. This is what they say about KLA: " They established a parallel government funded mainly by the Albanian diaspora. When this movement failed to yield results, an armed resistance emerged in 1997 in the form of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). The KLA's main goal was to secure the independence of Kosovo." More. It is not in any list of terrorist organisations.
Also, even the sources cited in article state that Albanianism is a concept founded by Albanian Rilindja movement of the XIX century - nevertheless in the text it is said that "These ideologies and Greater Albania have proponents that are not only nationalists but criminals[9] and terrorists[10...". There is no reference citing that Albanianism is an ideology of criminals and terrorists like stated in the article, in fact there is no reference that Albanian nationalism is criminal and terrorist. Cited are some articles that explain alternative ways of KLA founding. KLA is in no way a representative of Albanian nationalism, unless proven otherwise.
I think it is fair to start from these points and go on further bit by bit. Thanks! AnnaFabiano (talk) 13:53, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stop spamming and harassing the talk page.The reference is good.KLA was a terrorist organization it WAS listed and is now disbanded.Megistias (talk) 14:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but it was removed from the list before it got disbanded, furthermore it is not considered terrorist by US Gov. or any other gov NOW! Actually "The KLA's main goal was to secure the independence of Kosovo", this is what US State Dep. website says about KLA now. It is misleading to use a citation of a citation. AnnaFabiano (talk) 14:37, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article has a multitude of references exhibiting that the KLA was a terrorist and criminal organization.Spamming and harassing like you do does not change this.Megistias (talk) 14:44, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adding more citations does not change the fact that KLA is not considered a terrorist organisation by Western countires. There is no official document that indicates that. There is a number of books that say the American Government is terrorist (here one), but we do not say on Wikipedia that USA is a terrorist state, do we? You cannot declare an organisation terrorist with 2-3 or even 100 source. There is a definiton. Also I don't like repeating myself, but KLA is today considered The KLA's main goal was to secure the independence of Kosovo by US State Department. So your sources are not reliable or are just put in context to fit your story More. AnnaFabiano (talk) 16:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Better stop harassing.Megistias (talk) 16:28, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the KLA article itself Kosovo Liberation Army.Terrorists.The KLA was regarded by the US as a terrorist group until 1998 when it was de-listed,[3][4] and then the UK and the US lobbied France to do the same.[5]Megistias (talk) 16:42, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a reason why I was trying to encourage initially focusing on the three terms. Let's focus on one problem/dispute at a time. This disputed statement and the KLA issue will indeed have to be addressed (and I've added a section where this can be done), but right now it's just sidetracking everyone. For the rest of this thread, let us please return to focussing on the definitions. Askari Mark (Talk) 19:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was asked to give my input for the improvement of this article and I find rather difficult to find a starting point as the article is clearly composed not to explain Albanian nationalism, but to label as "terrorists" and "criminals" individuals and groups. I suggest that the opening paragraph clearly state what Albanian nationalism constitutes and what its political goals are, as well as principles and ideals that give rise to it. Also, I want to bring to your attention that the citations offered are either unreliable or have been misused. Saying that the KLA was a terrorist organization, because the U.S. considered it so, is to say that the U.S. sided with the terrorists in the Kosovo War in 1999. Also, using Greek sources might not be the best choice when raising an argument about alleged criminal activities (as long as the issue remains disputed in the academia).

I am not here to defend and/or promote Albanian nationalism, but I must warn the authors against double standards. Take a look for example at Basque nationalism and see whether ETA’s activities are mentioned in the opening paragraph. And I believe you all are aware of the differences between KLA and ETA, at least of the circumstances under which they pursued their activities.--Getoar TX (talk) 20:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article talks of nationalism.Groups that use it for profit or via profit that treads on crime is just a fact and not something that labels a nation as criminal as the article does not write this.KLA was a few thousand people and not all Albanians.The citations are reliable KLA was a terrorist organization ,no doubt there and it is exhibited that for the sake of its Politics the US took it of the list and pushed UK and French to do the same.Yes the US sided with them and Yes the US considered them terrorists,the US has aided Dictatorrs when it suits it , why is an armed group like KLA a surprise to you?

Note.The article is still under edition.Megistias (talk) 21:02, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Getoar TX. Since this is becoming a point of contention, I am temporarily commenting it out with hidden text notations and moving it to the Impacts on Albanian society and culture section. Some mention of the ideology's influence on the criminal element will need to be developed there. Askari Mark (Talk) 21:54, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I already moved it to Kosovo section since it concerns that region.I am still working on this.Megistias (talk) 21:56, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see there is a lot of confusion on this page about the three terms used in the beginning of the article. Being Albanian myself, I would be glad to help and clarify on the difference between “Albanian Nationalism” and “Albanianism” as it is a linguistic problem. In Albanian, there are two words: “shqiptaria” and “shqiptarizmi” with different definitions that both are translated in English as “Albanianism”.

Shqiptaria – is defined as “the Albanian unity, the Albanian People.”

Shqiptarizmi (or Shqiptarizëm) – is defined as “the Albanian national consciousness, the adoration of Albanians for their Motherland”

The first one (Shqiptaria) originates during the National Renaissance of Albania (Rilindja Kombëtare) of late 19th century. It is most widely used as a citation (including the ones on this article) of a poem written by Pashko Vasa at that time: “mos shikjoni kisha e xhamia, feja e shqiptarit është shqiptaria” translated to “swear an oath not to mind church or mosque, the faith (or religion) of the Albanians is Albanianism”. The term used here (shqiptaria) is used to create a unity between all Albanians as they were at that time spread amongst four Vilayets (Shkodër, Monastir, Janina and Kosovo) and belonged to different religion. I understand this is the issue AnnaFabiano tried to point out as a religious tolerance.

Both of the terms are nationalist but the first one (Shqiptaria) belonges to the National Albanian Renaissance (Rilindja Kombëtare) movement during the 19th century which was more concentrated on unifying the Albanians within the Ottoman Empire without highlighting ancient cultural claims. The second one (shqiptarizmi) on the other hand is a broader term describing Albanian nationalism in general and would suit the nationalist ideologies during the Communist Albania. The sources are the same (1 and 5) as the ones in the article.

I suggest that we move the terms Albanianism and Shqiptaria to the National Renaissance of Albania page as it specifically refers to that and instead use Shqiptarizmi as it better represents the ideologies expressed on this article.

Another option would be to put them on a separate section on the page removing them from the top with a shorter explanation about the National Albanian Renaissance which would then link to its main page.

I understand that the issue with both terms can be very confusing as they don’t have their parallel English translations. --Visar arifaj (talk) 02:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pan-Albanianism and Albanianism are used in modern literature to define Albanian modern nationalism,previous correlations like the old ones you mention are another thing,Enver Hoxha used the word to describe Albanian nationalism and thats in the article.Megistias (talk) 08:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you mean by "the old ones". The terms i used are of the modern Albanian language. The term Albanianism (shqiptaria) refers to the poem of Pashko Vasa (as it does by your sources also). The term might be used by many people afterwards (just like Enver Hoxha) but they can't claim it's meaning. It's the same as when we mention Evolution we refer to what Darwin has written and not anything after him.--Visar Arifaj (talk) 13:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They can ,do and did in that case as well.Hoxha used it and said it and its usage in general in the modern times is in the context of nationalism as we now know it.Megistias (talk) 13:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Visar Arifaj can you provide any Albanian schoolbooks from Kosovo?But they will be in Albanian so not much help.Megistias (talk) 18:58, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please read what nationalism is? AnnaFabiano (talk) 14:07, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because this discussion is not leading anywhere, I am proposing a page merger. AnnaFabiano (talk) 16:54, 7 September 2009 (UTC) - In line with other wiki projects that are similar like Serbian nationalism and Greek nationalism, I am proposing that this page should be united with National Renaissance of Albania. There is no reason why these two pages should be separate! AnnaFabiano (talk) 17:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is Albanian nationalism is a special caseMegistias (talk) 17:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How is it different: Megali idea - shall we put this on the Greek nationalism page. Or maybe Načertanije is a better example. AnnaFabiano (talk) 18:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are just disrupting and harassing me personally.Keep away.Albanian nationalism is current,active,extreme in its historical fantasies and a special case worthy of an article unto itself.Megistias (talk) 18:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Megistias and AnnaFabiano, please be patient with each other and stop attacking each other. No one owns this article; it is supposed to be a collaborative effort, which means that when we disagree, we disagree constructively. Okay?

I believe it is premature to propose a merge at this time, since the article is still being built. Merge proposals, in any case, do not normally "cure" disputes. I will restore the NPOV tag, though, as it is not constructive to remove such a tag before the disputants agree to a compromise approach. Megistias, please understand that this is not harassment nor an attack. It is simply a dispute to be resolved – preferably amicably. You are doing a good job of providing sourced information, so please continue. Askari Mark (Talk) 19:23, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The page cannot be merged as the material on this issue is vast and this is an issue on its own that outweighs by several tons the article Albanian nationalism and independence.A merge is an attempt to "hide the article under the rag".Megistias (talk) 21:53, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What makes this page difficult to define is that there is no central Albanian ideology (Similar to Načertanije or Megali Idea), also there no source (book or document) that defines Albanian nationalism. On the other hand Albanianism is (more or less) defined but it is related to religious tolerance as stated on citations from the beginning of the article and Here so it cannot be considered "linked with Revanchism, Irredentism and concepts of ethnic superiority against their neighboring states and peoples". So maybe, a better idea would be to create a new section for Albanianism and remove it from the top? What do you say? Also the concept of Pan-Albanianism would be better suited with Big Albania article as the two are one and the same. AnnaFabiano (talk) 23:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most modern European "mythic nationalisms" arose out of the Romantic movement of the late 18th through early 20th century. Albania's Romantic nationalism, which occurred late in that timeframe, has its roots there and this article needs to begin there and trace its subsequent evolution. Noel Malcolm, in the article you pointed me to, observes that "... Albania came very late to national statehood, and had only a short space of time – essentially the period 1878-1921 – in which to build the sort of national consciousness and national ideology that, in most other European countries, had been developing since at least the first stirrings of the Romantic movement."

According to Ger Duijzings, in the same source, its religious tolerance was a consequence of the inability to use it as a uniting vector, and the one attempt to do so based on the Bektashi was a failure. The revanchism and irredentism probably – I am not an expert – have their roots in the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire at the end of WWI, as well as, perhaps, the Greek annexations of the Ioannina vilayet (southern Epirus) in 1881 and 1913; however, the modern state holds no official revanchist claims, and from what I'm aware of, there is no strong popular sentiment in that country in favor of integrating Kosovo or any other Albanian-majority area. (The appeal of revanchism to the trans-national criminal element is, of course, apparent as a matter of its self-interest.) In short, it would seem that the appeal of a "Greater Albania" is at a rather low ebb today. In this article we have to deal with the more nuanced fact of an evolution of Albanian nationalism in which various elements have waxed and waned over the course of its development. Askari Mark (Talk) 02:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a link of a report that Magistias found and is used as a reference on this article. It shows two important thing that you mentioned previously. First "[Among Albanians] violence in the cause of a greater Albania, or of any shift of borders, is neither politically popular nor morally justified." and "It is instructive that both the KLA and NLA started to gain popular support in Kosovo and Macedonia respectively at precisely the time when they moved away from their initial pan-Albanian nationalist goals and concentrated on more rights for their own people" and "The “Albanian National Army” (ANA) which overtly advocated a “Greater Albania” agenda, never managed to gain popular credibility". You can also see the usage of the term "Pan-Albania" (Pan-Albanianism) and "Great Albania" for the same purpose. AnnaFabiano (talk) 10:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Related referenced materials are presented below. They can be used in the article

• The crescent and the eagle: Ottoman rule, Islam and the Albanians, 1874-1913 Volume 10 of Library of Ottoman studies Author George Walter Gawrych Edition illustrated Publisher I.B.Tauris, 2006 ISBN 1845112873, 9781845112875 [3]

In the early spring of 1877, a small number of ALbanians, concerned about the dangers facing Ottoman Empire, met secretly in Yanya under the leadership of Frasherli Abdul Bey, the oldest brother of Shemseddin Sami and a deputy in the Ottoman Parliament. They apparently drew up a program for the administrative autonomy of a single province of Albania as a means to preserve all lands inhabited by Albanians. Additionalideas for reform included language schools, and the restriction of military service by Albanians to Albania. This program represented the emergence of political Albanianism. Its political aim was an autonomous administration for Albania..(p. 40)

(Pashko Vasa's book) "Against this hostility and enmity, we (Albanians) found ourselves in defence of the rights of (our) ethnicity-nationality (hykuk-u kavmiyet)" Thus in this book political Albanianism was very much presented as a defensive responnse to external threats on Albanian lands, and it revolved around the important notion of rights of nationality for Albanians. (p. 59)

The Albanianism moto, from Pashko Vasa poetry:

Albanians, you are killing your brothers,

Into a hundred factions you are divided,
Some say "I believe in God" others "I in Allah"
Some say "I am Turk" others "I am Latin"
Some say "I am Greek", others "I am Slav"
But you are brother, all of you, my hapless people!
The priests and the hodjas have deceived you
To divide you and keep you poor
........
Awaken Albania, wake from your slumber,
Let us all as brothers, swear a common oath
And not look to church or mosque,

The faith of Albanians is Albanianism (shqyptarija)(p. 70)

In this poem, Vasa clearly expressed his own frustration over the disunity among Albanians.

In justifying a political union across regional, religious and tribal loyalties, Albanian nationalists argued that Albanians constituted a single nation with a common language, culture and history. (p. 71)

• The establishment of the Balkan national states, 1804-1920 Volume 8 of A History of East Central Europe Author Barbara Jelavich Edition reprint, illustrated Publisher University of Washington Press, 1986

In the midth-nineteenth century the area had attracted the interest of foreign scholars, most notably F. Bopp, who first argued that Albanian was an Indo-European language and the Austrian J. G. Hahn, generally regarded as the father of Albanology, who produced a grammar, a vocabolary, and a collection of folclore. By the end of the century was established that "the Albanians were descendants of a greaqt and ancient Indo-European people in the Balkans" This heritage played the same role in boosting national pride among Albanian intellectuals as did the similar links to the classical past among the Greeks and Romanians. Subsequently the study of Albanian history, language and folclore became popular, particularly among the Albanians in Italy. p. 225

• Albanian identities: myth and history Authors Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers, Bernd Jürgen Fischer Editors Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers, Bernd Jürgen Fischer Edition illustrated Publisher C. Hurst & Co. Publishers, 2002 ISBN 1850655723, 9781850655725 link [4]

If we compare Albanian nationalism with that of its Greek and Serb neighbours, we see that it starts several decades later and in another historical context. Albanian nationalism does not originate principally as a necessary result of the desire for the liberation from Turkish domination, as it was for Greek and Serb nationalism. Rather Albanian nationalism starts at the time of the Russian-Turkish war (1877-78) which brought independance to the Serbs. As the Turkish Empire began to rapidly disintegrate, it became necessary to save the regions inhabited by Albanians from the threat of being partitioned by the Serbs and Greeks. At the same time there ws a perceived need to differentiate Albanians from the urkish identity. p. 91-92

• Nations and nationalism since 1780: programme, myth, reality, Part 6 Canto Series A Canto Book Series History e-book project Canto (Cambridge University Press) Author Eric J. Hobsbawm Edition 2, illustrated, revised Publisher Cambridge University Press, 1992 ISBN 0521439612, 9780521439619

the Albanians living under rival cultural influences since classical antiquity, and divided among three or (if we include the locally centred Islamic cult of Bektashi) even four rival religions; Islam, Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. It was natural for the pioneers of ALbanian nationalism to seek an Albanian cultural identity in language, since religion and indeed almost everything else in Albania, seemed divisive rather than unifying. p. 53

So is there a book "Political Albanianism"? AnnaFabiano (talk) 11:45, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK there is no book with such a title. I don't understand the point of the question though:) Aigest (talk) 11:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because Greek nationalism had defined claims on their document called Megali Idea also Serb nationalists had their own. There is no central Albanian nationalist idea. There was a group of people who called for unity among Albanians. And it seems that was it. I am trying to gather information that shows the difference between Albanian nationalism (which we do not seem to define other that Albanian Renascence), Albanianism and Pan-Albanianism. AnnaFabiano (talk) 12:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NO there is no such document such as Megali Idea or Načertanije. If you see the sources above the main idea of Albanianism was to create the unity among Albanians which were divided by social and religious factors (as you can see the poetry itself the base of Albanian moto). In the beginning the main idea was the defense of the lands inhabited by Albanians which were pretended by their neighbors (right or wrong is another issue). Even after the partition of the Ottoman Empire in 1913 (where many Albanian inhabited territories were given to the neighbors) the Albanianism was a factor of the unity of the people (having different religions and local traditions). In communism this moto was used against religion by the communist regime again against religion (see above) so we can say that Albanianism is more related to ethnic identity of the Albanians (how an Albanian is self-defined) giving the different religions in Albania. To be an Albanian it is in no way related to the religion you belong, but to the national identity (mostly language and now common history). A inverse example would have been the role of the religion in national identity especially in the Balkans. (Bosnia eg the same originally Slav population is self defined by the religion. Bosnians, Serbs, Croat as related to Moslem, Orthodox and Catholic religion). Common line Albanianism is a factor of unity among Albanians. Aigest (talk) 12:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, where are you getting at Aigest? AnnaFabiano (talk) 13:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. You don't have to answer. AnnaFabiano (talk) 13:28, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• As another user (Visar arifaj) tried to explain above Albanianism term was first attested in National Renaissance of Albania period as an ideological nationalistic background trying to forge the unity among Albanians. It is related to Albanian nationalism in the sense that it can be considered as an ethnic type of nationalism.

• The pan-Albanianism is a neologism a term used only very recently by foreign scholars. It is related to the term Greater Albania. It is to be noted that Albanians themselves use the term Ethnic Albania instead of Greater Albania. The term Greater Albania was introduced by Italians in 1940 trying to gain support from Albanians in their wars with Greece and Yugoslavia when part of neighbor's territories were annexed to Albanian satellite state. The same was done by Nazi Germans later. The term refers to territories once inhabited by ethnic Albanians.

Accordingly Albanianism and Pan-Albanianism are not the same. The first term represents the nationalism or patriotism while the second one represents the irredentism Aigest (talk) 13:47, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

today they are used to define Albanian nationalism15:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

• Nihil obstat: religion, politics, and social change in East-Central Europe and Russia Author Sabrina P. Ramet Publisher Duke University Press, 1998 ISBN 0822320703, 9780822320708

Not only can one no longer speak of "Albanianism" as a religion, but one can no longer even use the phrase "the religion of Albania" coherently. p.226

Albanianism is used for Albanian nationalism in modern context as the refs show and thats what it is.The religion of Albanians is nationalism.Megistias (talk) 15:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Magistias! Your references are really massive and helpful, but I think that we have to be careful with WP:SYNTH. I think there is a lot of sentences that have this problem. You have to find proper references on these sentences. Otherwise they are in contradiction with WP policy. AnnaFabiano (talk) 13:52, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with AnnaFabiano here as this is a delicate topic. As my comment for the first paragraph the use of terms Revanchism irredentism or ethnic superiority against their neighboring states and peoples is unacceptable. This kind of vocabulary is not mentioned in any nationalism related article even those propagated by the state such as Megali Idea or Načertanije. I am going to remove that sentence until you find exact inline citation. Aigest (talk) 14:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is about modern nationalism Megali Idea or Načertanije are not modern.The article is supported by referneces.Just like Anna you are just disrupting.Megistias (talk) 14:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You don't own the article, please collaborate and stop doing WP:SYNTH Aigest (talk) 14:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:SYNTH. AnnaFabiano (talk) 14:07, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stop pretending you dont know English.Megali Idea and Načertanije are old.This is modern and not Synth.Megistias (talk) 14:08, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"This article is about modern nationalism Megali Idea or Načertanije are not modern." What kind of logic is that? as for references they don't specifically say that. Given the sensibility of the topic a full inline citation would have been more appropriate than your periphasing which is specifically WP:SYNTH Aigest (talk) 14:10, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Find a reference that shows "revanchism" or "ethnic superiority against their neighboring states and peoples"! AnnaFabiano (talk) 14:14, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As i pointed out in my comments the reference are linked to territorial rights (we were before them etc) not to ethnic superiority. Don't misuse references. Aigest (talk) 09:23, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is mainly based on theories, most of them adopted by local scholars. I will try to make a copy-edit job, but massive deletion of comment is just unconstructive. AnnaFabiano: I'm sure we can reach a concensus, in order to improve the article's quality. The disagreement is mostly based on minor expressions Alexikoua (talk) 09:35, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ref11.Communism and the Emergence of Democracy by Harald Wydra,2007,ISBN-10-0521851696,page 230,"Albanians tended to go further back in time to the sixth and seventh centuries, claiming an Illyrian- Albanian continuity and superiority over Slavic people. ..."

• This example has to do with ethnic superiority and many references point this out all over the article.Pretending you cant read English?Megistias (talk) 09:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• 1 The reference is not a book on the topic
• 2 The author is not an expert or an authority on this specific field in fact in the book reviews the author is accused of "Where he does cite the literature Wydra does so in a very tendentious or exaggerated manner. One could pick out many examples of this" or "Wydra to back his argument by making conceptual connections that do not exist or are very fragile at best." or "The thinness of Wydra's research and descriptive analysis is simply stunning. As is often the case with potted history, interpretation is sometimes so abrupt that it leads to errors. It is incredible how off the mark Wydra is at times and this has to cast doubts on how much he actually knows about the subjects he is writing about and the diligence of his research." you can find the full review here [5] and that makes him not an authority in this matter
• 3 That specific comment was for Kosovo issue.Giving the reviews I am doubting about his claim but anyway from that reference you can say that Kosovar Albanians pretended that Illyrian Albanians were superior to Slavs, while Slavs pretended that they were "the elected people". That belongs to Myths and Identities on both sides we have a specific book on this (Fischer) which can be used in the article Aigest (talk) 10:22, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Make an article on modern Serbian nationalism thenMegistias (talk) 15:13, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After seeing all Balkan related articles in Wiki (in Alphabetical order) Bosnian nationalism, Bulgarian nationalism, Croatian nationalism, Greek nationalism, Romanian nationalism, Serb nationalism, Slovenian nationalism, and Rise of nationalism under the Ottoman Empire sincerely I don't see where this article is pointing at.

• Does it point to Albanian Nationalism history? Then it began with National Renaissance of Albania and continued after
• Does it point to Albanianism concept? It is a factor of unity, religious tolerance and identity, began with Pashko Vasa poetry
• Does it point to Greater Albania? It is an irredentist concept, which has it's own article.
• Does it point to Albanian Myths and Identities? There is a book on that, but that is different from Albanian nationalism

Can we have a clear picture what do you have in mind Megistias. In this state the article is a mish-mash of the above topics. Aigest (talk) 10:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Although this article has a huge amount of useful information, I think it can all be spread to other articles. Albanian nationalism and independence, Great Albania and Albanianism (would be a good article).

There is no information about Albanian nationalism per se. There is information about Pan-Albanianism and Albanianism. Which are two separate articles.

Nevertheless maybe we can wait and see where Magistias is headed with this. AnnaFabiano (talk) 13:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading,pretending not to read or understand the references again AnnaMegistias (talk) 15:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Aigest. Article is clear attempt at POV pushing in order to smear Albanians in general. It's a mish mash of qoutes who are put together only for the above stated purpose.--I Pakapshem (talk) 21:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Megistias you continue to edit but you still didn't answer to my questions above. Would you be so kind to tell us where do you point with this article since there are different topics and a mish-mash of them. Aigest (talk) 09:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article speaks for itself and the essence of your negativity towards it is ignoring what backs it up.Also i cant really handle any more tag-teaming, narrow level arguments & nationalist advocating against the article.Megistias (talk) 09:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ones that live in glasses houses should not throw stones. Tag teaming, narrow level arguments and nationalis advocating is excatly what you, alexikoua, athenean, michale x white, factuarius and many other greek editors do. As soon as you come back from being off wiki for a year, all of a sudden you create this article and notify all of the above to "take a look" at it. Don't try to play others for fools. You agenda is clear.--I Pakapshem (talk) 14:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that article speaks for himself. Actually is a mishmash of different topics. Can you be more specific at where do you want to point? Aigest (talk) 09:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is that so, I Pakapshem? You tell Wikipedia users with several hundred constructive edits and contribs that they are "advocating" and have an agenda, while you have not made ONE constructive edit?? Give us one contribution of yours that was not nationalistically-heated, personally-aggressive and around Albania. I'd be happy to hear such remarks after you do that. Thank you.--Michael X the White (talk) 18:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I could care less how many edits and contributions you have. Why are you guys so interested in editing Albanian articles? Is it because of your altruistic nature? I highly doubt it. All of the greek editors edits in Albanian or Albanian related articles are always done to undermine or to demean Albanian and Albanian related articles, so of course I'll be there to make sure that all of these distortions don't go unchecked.--I Pakapshem (talk) 14:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No one can make and edit here, Michael. Megistias does not allow us! AnnaFabiano (talk) 19:25, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am referring to edits in WP as a whole ;)--Michael X the White (talk) 20:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This version

Albanian nationalism (also known as Albanianism[1][2][3][4][5] or Pan-Albanianism[6][7]) refers to nationalist Albanian ideologies and theories that were cemented during Communist Albania (1945-1991), its continuation into modern Albania, as well as its proliferation in Kosovo. Albanian nationalist ideology considers Albanians to be Illyrians and co-identifies them with Ancient Greeks, Pelasgians[8][9] and Etruscans[10] giving all these peoples Albanian origins. This historical revisionist ideology is linked mainly with, irredentism and concepts of ethnic superiority against their neighboring states and peoples[11][12][13][14]

• Is pure WP:SYNTH
• References are misquoted, they are linked with territorial claim not ethnic superiority see above debate

Albanian nationalism (also known as Albanianism[1][2][3][4][5] or Pan-Albanianism[6][7]) refers to nationalist Albanian ideologies and theories that were cemented during Communist Albania (1945-1991), Albaniansins and Pan-Albanianism were cemented during HOXHA? Who says that?

1. Albanianism was originated and developed during National resistance. Later it was used by Hoxha against religion, into building the new socialist man. However Hoxha's arguments were others(marxist terms and logic, internationalism, oppression etc)

2. Pan-Albanianism was originated by Italians and was never used by Hoxha, on the contrary its political adversaries accused him of "selling" Kosovo

its continuation into modern Albania, as well as its proliferation in Kosovo?

1. Kosovo was the origin of Albanian nationalism and the main factor in Albanian indipendence

Albanian nationalist ideology considers Albanians to be Illyrians and co-identifies them with Ancient Greeks, Pelasgians[8][9] and Etruscans[10]

1. Can I have a text of Albanian nationalist ideology? Who published that and who supported. Read ideology what it means first

2. Co-identifies with Ancient greeks? Who said that? Albanian nationalist ideology not for sure, maybe some self made publications of wannabe historians amateurs

3. Etruscans? Sure were not messapians? The same as above argument

giving all these peoples Albanian origins.?

1. Yeah sure Albanians originated Pelasgians:)

This historical revisionist ideology

1. Can we have a text of Albanian revisionist ideology? You mean they revisioned the old one? What happened to poor Pelasgians?

is linked mainly with, irredentism and concepts of ethnic superiority against their neighboring states and peoples[11][12][13][14]

1. References are linked to territorial claim (We were here before them argument) not to ethnic superiority.

For these reason this paragraph is unacceptable Aigest (talk) 14:49, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are lying and misleading, take your Albanian gang and scurry off.Hoxha and communism was nationalistic to the max as the references dictate.Hitler like tactics followed by Hoxha.Oust.14:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Ganging up wont work.People can read the References.Megistias (talk) 14:55, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The modern Albanian state as well as the communistic supports this crap,Megistias (talk) 14:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Megistias, the only lier and misleader here are you. Hoxha was anything but nationalistic. You have zero knowledge of him or his communist regime. Hoxha continously broke relations with Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union and China for not being communist enough. Hoxha's communism is revered even today by hard core commies for being the purest form of Stalinist-Leninist-Marxist Anti-Revisionist Communism. Your behavior, language and intentions are totally uncivil and filled with bad intentions, on top of the fact that you are engaged in an edit war, refusing to compromise over any issue and continously reverting other editor's contributions. You will be reported for all of this stuff.--I Pakapshem (talk) 21:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You obviously havent read the article even once.Megistias (talk) 21:50, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What are you saying that the writers on all those references lie?Megistias (talk) 21:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have read the article more than once, and I told you that there is a lot of crap out there and just because it's easily available and therefore usable as source here, it does not mean it's correct.--I Pakapshem (talk) 15:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is turning into a joke. Everyone can make claims and find references that support your claims (e.g.: Greek and Serbian nationalism have claims to destroy Albania and Albanians, Macedonia and Greece: the struggle to define a new Balkan nation By John Shea, page 341 this book and Greek government has claims for "northern Epirus and local [Greek] politicians quietly advocate separatism Revolution and change in Central and Eastern Europe By Minton F. Goldman, page 18 and here). The main purpose of Wikipedia is to inform people. Wikipedia is not a place for propaganda. AnnaFabiano (talk) 15:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leave Albanian gang.The article is getting vandalized everytime you edit it.Your only desire is to dissasembly and make it dissapear.You fake not being able to understand sources and mislead.References speak for themselves.Megistias (talk) 15:01, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What a joke, propaganda is all that the Albanian educational system is as the references say.If you dont like it make a Greek nationalism article about modern and current nationalism.Megistias (talk) 15:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudohistorical claims by the Albanian goverment and other Albanian sources are on the level of this ridiculous thing Epsilon Team.Star trek circus junk!Megistias (talk) 15:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Megistias, I am from Kosovo. I have been through the school system here and I can assure you that it has nothing to do with the ideologies you are talking about. I can provide you with the schoolbooks if necessary. Yes, the books claim that the Albanians are descendants of Illyrians but there are no mentions of superiority to other neighboring nations (or claim that Aristotle was Albanian!!! I first heard that from you). As you might be aware, more than half of the Albanians live outside of Albania. That being the case, it is wrong to associate Enver Hoxha's ideas of nationalism which were with all Albanian nationalism. Albanian Nationalism is not that of Albanians in Albania but of all the Albanians in the Balkans.--Visar Arifaj (talk) 15:41, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander the Great and Aristotle refers to Albanian schoolbooks in Albania not in Kosovo.The article does not assume that all Albanians are nationalists but that to a point the state system and the private factors push things in that direction.Megistias (talk) 15:55, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What a blatant ridiculous lie by you Megistias whose only purpose for this article is to smear Albanians. I have gone through the Albanian education system in Albanian proper and no booke ever mentioned Aristotle or Alexander being Albanian.--I Pakapshem (talk) 21:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Me and man other users have spent several thousands of hours staving off claims against various ancient Greeks by Albanian users that claim they were Albanian or similar situations related to such(laughable) claims.Example;There are Albanian users claiming that Odysseus was Albanian.Megistias (talk) 15:59, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In that case the page should be called "Nationalism in Albania" not "Albanian Nationalism" because the second one includes all the Albanians. If we want to write about Albanian Nationalism then we have to start from the Albanian Renaissance. It has started before creation of the creation of the country Albania which left out mos of Albanians. I think Aigest has given a pretty good outline of how we can classify Albanian Nationalism--Visar Arifaj (talk) 16:09, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, claims like "Odysseus was Albanian" are ridiculous but we have to be careful not to put our private encounters with historical, official or mass claims.--Visar Arifaj (talk) 16:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

sadly the propaganda of the communist regime in Albania has carried on today.Schoolbooks and official state positions.Megistias (talk) 16:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Outright ridiculous lie. You need to go and touch and official albanian schoolbook before you even start speaking of them.--I Pakapshem (talk) 21:18, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thats referencedMegistias (talk) 21:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a whole lot of crap out there that can be used as "references".--I Pakapshem (talk) 23:18, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For that reason I'm suggesting (above) that that should be called "Nationalism in Albania" because it was isolated within the Albanian state and not spread throughout all Albanians.--Visar Arifaj (talk) 16:47, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that but it has spread to kosovo to the degree stated in the article so it would

be the nationalism of the albanians thus albanian nationalismMegistias (talk) 16:55, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any other suggestions for a name?Megistias (talk) 16:59, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Nationalism in Albania? AnnaFabiano (talk) 17:01, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nationalism in Albania misses the point. Albanians can be nationalists even outside Albania. I think the title is perfectly fine.--Michael X the White (talk) 18:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Michael. I'm not saying that we should remove "Albanian Nationalism", of course there is one. What I was trying to tell was that it is different from "Nationalism in Albania" that refers to the Communist regime under Enver Hoxha which was solely in Albania.

Megistias, I think I'd agree that we can put this part (Enver Hoxha's regime) under "Nationalism in Albania". It would also be better to specify during which period it was so as to avoid generalizing things.--Visar Arifaj (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see! Sorry ;)--Michael X the White (talk) 19:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the hidden text in the article and highlight Kosovo.Megistias (talk) 23:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have a solution. How about calling this page Albanian nationalist claims and redirecting Albanian nationalism to Albanian nationalism and independence as it was earlier (6-7 days ago)? Would that be OK with everyone? AnnaFabiano (talk) 23:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is that modern Albanian nationalism is at its Zenith and its not plain 19th century "birth of nations nationalism" its living thriving pulsing with "life".These are official positions of the Albanian state or states to varying degrees and honestly the few other states with such claims are Republic of Macedonia and very few others on a world wide scale.Megistias (talk) 23:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is what you call talking out of your ass. Familiarize yourself with the official position of both Albanians states. They're not even a quarter as nationalistic as the offcial position of the Greek state.--I Pakapshem (talk) 02:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About 7 different liberation armies, various fronts,Communist nationalistic propaganda recreated to this day....Alexander the Albanian,Aristotle the Albanian...and many other things.This is just too much i am afraid.Megistias (talk) 23:22, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Magistias, your country has allot of terrorist organisations that are recongised as such by your own country. Should we make a page NOW and call it Greek terrorism. You are marking an entire nation here. Do you understand that. And please can you not remove the RfC (whoever did!) AnnaFabiano (talk) 23:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I or/and the article are not marking an entire nation under any circumstances.This is based on references and the article does not mark the millions of Albanians as something malicious or something bad you have in your mind.On Greek terrorists , you are referring to anarchist/communist groups in Greece that put bombs and break down everything.You can make a page if you want they are criminals.-I did not remove the Rfc,check the history i cant seem to tell when it vanished.Megistias (talk)

Ok it reapppeared, it had vanished when i used this symbol - - - > to make point on the text.Megistias (talk) 23:36, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is just such an article Anna Terrorism in Greece .Megistias (talk) 23:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok good. Maybe your intentions are not to mark an entire nation as nationalist, irredentist and so on... but, still, you are doing that. Furthermore, you can publish all this information, I really think is good (I can help with grammar and some minor changes - specially in ordering). But it is a discimination to make the page of Albanian nationalism the only one that is linked to terrorism and irredentism ect. AnnaFabiano (talk) 23:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but these small details are very important, if you say Greek terrorism you claim that the entire nation is terrorist. If you say terrorism in Greece, that is more correct. Maybe we can call the page Nationalism in Albania (or among Albanians)? AnnaFabiano (talk) 23:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorism is different than nationalism as you very well know.Calling it Nationalism in Albania is a semantic "redirect", or like looking at a mirror.I understand that Albanian nationalism is a discrimination when in other cases it leads to "birth of nations nationalism".Albania is a special case and articles on other similar cases should have such a title and "discrimination" but they are very few so we would have to make on on the other such states(RoM & others).I have thought of this too, dont think i did not realize this.In effect this article is a continuation of the Albanian independence and renaisance article because today Albanian nationalism sadly has this fiery status and the data are gargantuan in quantity.Megistias (talk) 23:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the lighter side.What you are saying is like saying that we should do something about Epsilon team article because some reader might think that all Greeks believe in that thing thus we could be branded as ,well Morons as a whole nation.Megistias (talk) 23:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If this article was merged with the independence article it would have to split as data on this are colossal.Megistias (talk)

I agree. There is some useful information that could go to Albanian nationalism and independence (this page is not very well done may I add) however allot of it could be part of a new page that we can create with a consensus. We can discuss about it's name. My proposal is Nationalism among Albanians or Albanian nationalist claims. AnnaFabiano (talk) 00:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I say "this" I mean Albanian nationalism and independence AnnaFabiano (talk) 00:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know the page you mean very well.But it cant happen because of the many factors.This is Albanian nationalism and just that,state sponsored and extreme.You are quoting redirects right now.What can and should be done is find more references for this page.Megistias (talk) 00:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Magistias, I know you are now getting emotionally connected with this page. But trust me, sooner or later you are going to see that "Albanian nationalism" spots every Albanian as nationalist. There is no state sponsored nationalism in Kosovo, neither in Albania. But there are nationalist groups in Kosovo and Albania (thought I am more informed about Kosovo) and they are and tend to be extreme. You have information about some of them. I think I have other sources about more than that. But what is important to me, and to all others that were opposing you here is that this page is offensive to Albanians. You are calling everyone (Albanian) a terrorist and a criminal. And the main problem seems to be the name (and this is something that I figured now) AnnaFabiano (talk) 00:37, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its clear from the article and its multitude of references and that nationalism is to an extent state sponsored.Aristotle the Albanian is pretty clear.Repeating myself against you denial to see or read the reality of the article is something you should heed.Actually the ones to blame here are the politicians of the past decades and not the references or me.Megistias (talk) 05:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV disputed? AnnaFabiano (talk) 15:57, 9 September 2009 (UTC) Tendentious editing and vandalism? AnnaFabiano (talk) 16:11, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are the ones ganging up and vandalizing while attempting to discredit the article and the references.Megistias (talk) 16:31, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV disputed? This article perfectly expresses neutrality, using neutral sources and references everywhere. With a slight rewording in some parts, some expansion and the inclusion of other aspects (the Albanian currency?) this could even go for GA.--Michael X the White (talk) 18:04, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Michael, thank you for your input! But you are a Greek. Your neutrality can be disputed. We are looking for a non-biased non-Greek, non-Albanian, non-Serbian opinion. AnnaFabiano (talk) 18:11, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have not been involved, though. As this is an RFC case and you're the nominator, could you please provide the specific parts that seem POV to you?--Michael X the White (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First of all is the name Albanian nationalism, it tends to mark all Albanians as nationalists. Second, there are some sentences that we mentioned earlier that seem to have a WP:SYNTH problem.

• Starting from the first sentence "Albanian nationalism (also known as Albanianism[1][2][3][4][5] or Pan-Albanianism[6][7]) refers to nationalist Albanian ideologies and theories that were cemented during Communist Albania (1945-1991), its continuation into modern Albania, as well as its proliferation in Kosovo". This is a formulation done by the authors, there is no reference to back that. There is no such definition in any book.
• Albanian nationalist ideology considers Albanians to be Illyrians and co-identifies them with Ancient Greeks,the mythical[8] Pelasgians[9][10] and the Etruscans[11] giving all these peoples Albanian origins. This is not nationalistic. Illyrian-Albanian continuance is still very active and it is considered the mos plausible theory by mos Western Scholars. Read Illyrians, Origins of the Albanians and Albanian language. ...giving all these peoples Albanian origins This means that Illyrians, Etruscans and Pelasgians had Albanian' origin? This is not based on any reference given. This could be a grammatical error, but nonetheless!!! The part about Ancient Greeks and Etruscans is fine.
• Albanian nationalists and the Albanian state[16][17] claim that Aristotle,[18] Pyrrhus of Epirus,[19] Alexander the Great,[20] and Phillip II of Macedon (along with all the ancient Macedonians) were Pelasgian-Illyrian-Albanian[21]. Who is Albanian nationalism, is there a centralized group of people that claim that, or what? It is badly structured!

There is a lot of information that should be rewritten or reformulated, without changing the direction of the page, but for the moment it is entirely fictional and offensive, among others the name. On the discussion there were some proposals about the name of the page. AnnaFabiano (talk) 00:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• 1.As our discussion above( Albanian nationalist claims ) clarifies it does not but you keep on repeating it.
• 2.There is a number of references to back this up but you are refusing to aknowledge what is happening in the article and the *talk page.You write above that there is no state sponsored nationalism?Many references point that there is.Aristotle the *Albanian is in the article for an example.
• 3.This is what is happening and it is claimed that they had Albanian origin by Albanian nationalism.Again dont pretend that the *refs dont exist.
• 4.Its referenced.
• 5."it is entirely fictional and offensive", what is offensive is you repeated action of pretending not to read the references.What is offensive is the actions of the Albanian state,not the article, the authors of the references, or me.

Megistias (talk) 05:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The way the Albanian state claims its history is of course nationalistic.Illyrians had notning to do with Pelasgians and Ancient Greeks.Aristotle and Alexander the Great were not Albanians.The three articles you pointed out show that Albanians are most likely not even related Origins_of_the_Albanians#Arguments_against_Illyrian_origin] to Illyrians themselves and but are to some Dacian north offshoot.Megistias (talk) 05:25, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About the main points

About A.Fabiano main points I have add the following:

• The term 'Albanian nationalism' off course does not mark all Albanians as nationlists, that's sure. We have also articles with titles: Albanian mafia, Albanian pederasty, Greek pederasty, Greek nationalism, it's easy to conclude that.
• About the lead there is a clear sequence Albanian nationlism-Albanism-Panalbanism... what's wrong with all of that? I mean the sentence is more than clear, apart from some minor copy-edit job.
• Even if Albanian-Illyrian continuance is still active, it is still on a theoretical background, there is no clear connection, see Origin of Albanians, we have a number of theories, not a single one. It's easy to conclude that if we change history in order to make the a population to seem ancient, native and homogenous we have a clear issue of promoting nationalistic feeling and superiority.
• That point needs a copy-edit job, I agree.
• Still agree for a copy-edit job, but how could be the entire article be fictional? Megistias provided numerous books and publications with quoetes and pages, which means it's based on modern bibliography.

I'm sure the disagreements can be solved and we need to make a word by word checking. Off course asking the article to be renamed is out of the question.Alexikoua (talk) 08:02, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alexi, Greek nationalism is an article about Greek Renaissance, while Albanian nationalism is about "Albanian terrorism" and "Albanian criminality". I just think, that this page should be renamed to something else. Nonetheless keep Albanian nationalism redirected to what is now Albanian nationalism and independence, as it was a week ago! AnnaFabiano (talk) 11:12, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS--Michael X the White (talk) 18:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes these comparisons are invalid, and sometimes they are valid. — WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS AnnaFabiano (talk) 19:34, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aigest you shouldnt urge users to copy paste your "answers",[6],[7], [8].Megistias (talk) 09:04, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't urge them to use my arguments, I just gave them the right to move my materials to this talk page if they felt necessary since the questions were on that talk page and the answers also. If Askari thinks that his questions and my answer can be placed her that he can copyedit my response here. The same can be said for Anna or even Visar which are participating in this article. Even you can copyedit my asnwers here if you like. Please try to understand even such simple things Megistias, your attitude is not helping the development of the article. Aigest (talk) 09:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aigist: You are trying to make things hot. Please calm down, there is no reason to create battleground. We have to try to avoid direct accusation and focus on the copy-edit job (both sides).Alexikoua (talk) 09:36, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let's say I have been wrongly accused. Here the Askari question in my talk page [9] and here my response on Visar talk page [10] and the comment on Askari page [11] when he could copy paste them here and since Anna had similar questions and contributed here I notified here about my answers even allowing to move them here if necessary. You can see from that answers that Askari questions and my answers can clarify some of the topics and issues here [12]. I don't pretend to be an expert in the field (apart the fact of being accused as Albanian nationalist here in wiki:) and also the fact of being first eye witness of communist regime and propaganda in Albania) but the references are quite on the topic (Albanian nationalism, Bektashism etc) that's why I took the time to copy large section there. Aigest (talk) 09:45, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Attempting to coordinate user's answers is pretty clear.But your answers dont nullify the existing sources for the article.Megistias (talk) 09:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was no attempt to "coordinate answers". For one thing, I am part of no faction. More essentially, though, I personally asked Visar arifaj and Aigest – who had been helpful earlier on this talk page in explaining some of the subtle intricacies of Albanian nationalism – some specific questions to further my understanding of mine. Askari Mark (Talk) 22:48, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Calm down Megistias and try to understand simple things. To allow smb to copyedit your comments is coordination of answers?! Haha in this case why don't you copyedit them (I have specifically allowed you to do that) so we all have a same exact opinion:)? I think we are all grown enough here to understand that nonsense accusation. BTW I have made you some questions above, I would appreciate if you answer to them. Aigest (talk) 09:54, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questions have been answered and the article is referenced.Megistias (talk) 09:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At what paragraph specifically as I read all the talk page comments and couldn't find them. Aigest (talk) 10:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still this is an RFC because it was believed to be POV

...yet none of the parts AnnaFabiano referred to have anything to do with POV.--Michael X the White (talk) 18:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well there is POV, Tendentious editing, WP:SYNTH... I mean just read the first paragraph, it says Albanian nationalism (who is Albanian nationalism?) claims that Pelasgians, Illyrians and Etruscans have all Albanian origin. At least he could say that Albanians have Pelasgian, Illyrian and Etruscan origin. And saying Albanian nationalism claims, is like saying that all Albanian nationalist have the same claim. I can guarantee that all Albanian nationalist do not have the same claims, and I (together with other editors) have proven that on this discussion more than once... AnnaFabiano (talk) 19:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So your issue is the choice of phrases? I said myself that it needs rewording and perhaps you could diversify the nationalist tedencies with phrases like "Some Albanian nationalists..." or "another nationalist theory claims that...". But I do not see this as POV.--Michael X the White (talk) 19:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

However, it is not recognised by any international power and the name "Kosova" remains more widely used among the Albanian population. - look at this sentence, this is like claiming that because Greeks call themselves Hellene they are nationalist. I mean, this article has allot of information seen only by one side. Here is a report by ICG (International Crisis Group) that show there is no irredentist or nationalist threat from Albanians or from so-called Pan-Albanianism.

Saying there is is a POV. For more, just read this talk page. —AnnaFabiano (talk) 20:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not really get your point about Kosova.--Michael X the White (talk) 21:14, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was a sentence from the article. —AnnaFabiano (talk) 21:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Main points AGAINST this article (RfC)

Information that shows irregularities, tendentious editing, vandalism and POV on this article should written here: I will start from what looks to be the main problem.

• Albanian nationalism refers to nationalism among Albanians. It should not necessarily show only claims made by certain circles as is done in this article. So the first sentence of the article: Albanian nationalism (also known as Albanianism[1][2][3][4][5] or Pan-Albanianism[6][7]) refers to nationalist Albanian ideologies and theories that were cemented during Communist Albania (1945-1991), its continuation into modern Albania, as well as its proliferation in Kosovo is a POV. Albanian nationalism does not refer only to ideologies and theories that were cemented during Communist Albania... it refers also to Albanian national uprising and Renaissance and Albanian national pride.
• Kosovo is a disputed matter and to say: "The struggle for the liberation of Kosovo from Serb rule became the struggle for the recovery of the ancient land of'the Dardanians and thus a re-creation of their ancient kingdom" is a POV. Here are references that beg to differ One, Two, Three and Four. For more read Kosovo.

Let's start from these two issues! —AnnaFabiano (talk) 22:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

REPLIES (RfC)

Replies to the above-made questions. AnnaFabiano (talk) 22:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Changed the order. —AnnaFabiano (talk) 22:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFC comment

Non-involved editors will not make RFC comments while the RFC proposer floods the section of the talk page dedicated to the RFC with their own commentary Fifelfoo (talk) 14:41, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I asked several questions regarding this subject on Visar arifaj‎'s talk page and invited Aigest to comment there as well, since both had earlier been helpful with their explanations. Aigest has been generous with his comments and shared them here, and I am adding my original questions as well for better context. The purpose of my questions was to continue to try to nail down reliable definitions for the three terms used – Albanian nationalism, Albanianism, and Pan-Albanianism – to clarify the subject matter. Any further constructive responses would be welcome. Askari Mark (Talk) 03:20, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

1) Is there today a modern, post-communist nationalism in Albania that is simply national pride, much like in other countries, that is non-revanchist? (I suspect Megistias is actually trying to address this post-Albanian National Renaissance period in this article.) If so, how does it differ from the older romantic "Albanian nationalism" and what would the proper term for that be?

There was no such thing as communist nationalism. Communism by defintion can't be nationalistic. Hoxha used certain nationalistic aspects in his communist rule but only to strengthen his and his Party's position of power. And I don't understand what you mean by revanchist, because the desire of Albanians to unite all Albanian populated lands into one state is not revanchist but a natural desire of self determination and rule.--I Pakapshem (talk) 14:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly communism can be nationalistic – not in pure theory, no, but in actual practice, nationalism has often been drawn on to strengthen loyalty to the regime or as a basis to disenfranchise, expel, or purge minority ethnic groups. The more paranoid and insecure the nomenklatura, the more likely they are to fall back on nationalistic (e.g., “motherland” or “fatherland”) and ethnic themes and traditions (as practical political measures). Askari Mark (Talk) 23:09, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My point excatly, it's pseudo nationalism used as a tool to legitimize and stregthen the system. It's nationalism por pragmatic purposes, and therefore false. It's nationalism with clear nationalistic intentions. Hoxha and the commies are considered the biggest traitors to the Albanian cause in history by true Albanian nationalists.--I Pakapshem (talk) 15:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2) If I correctly understand your explanation on the talk page, Shqiptaria (= Albanian nationalism?) – "the Albanian unity, the Albanian People" is the non-religious formulation of Albanian nationalism, while Shqiptarizmi (= Albanianism?) – "the Albanian national consciousness, the adoration of Albanians for their Motherland" is the anti-religious usage that predominated under Hoxha. Am I correct?

Hoxha never advanced such a specific position as you put it. His main goal was to remain in power under all circumstances and through any means. All these terms in general are used by foreigners rather than Albanians. Albanianism is actually translated as Shqiptarizmi and it means the unity of all Albanian people beyond religious differences, and under a common language, culture and heritage and it is not anti-relgious per se.--I Pakapshem (talk) 14:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

3) Was the attempt to coopt Bektashi as a sort of unifying civil religion a part of Shqiptaria – and were there different terms for religious-independent and Bektashi-based presentations of Shqiptaria?

There was no attempt to coopt Bektashism as a unifying civil religion, ever in Albania.--I Pakapshem (talk) 14:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The writings of Ger Duijzings in the Schwandner-Sievers & Fischer source indicates that Naim Frashëri attempted to do just that. Did you perhaps mean to say that it was never successful (which would be true) as opposed to never attempted? Askari Mark (Talk) 23:09, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know how reliable that is. Bektashism is definetly associated with Albanian nationalism, since it's nominally muslim while preserving albanian pagan rites but I've never come across any material that says it was looked upon as unifying civil religion among all Albanians.--I Pakapshem (talk) 15:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

4) Was pan-Albanianism strictly a communist-era development or did it evolve from or parallel to Shqiptaria – and what would be the Albanian term for Hoxha's version(s)? Aigest calls it a modern scholarly neologism, while Megistias says that "Albanianism" and "pan-Albanianism" are treated as synonymous with modern-day "Albanian nationalism"; if they have indeed merged – or diverged post-Hoxha – can we say when and how?

Aigest is correct when he say is modern scholarly neologism, mostly used by foreigners. Hoxha never advanced any such position as pan-albanianism. As I said above Hoxha's ideology was strict marxist-leninist-stalinist anti-revisionist internationalist communism. If anything, Hoxha hurt Albanian nationalism more than anybody in the history of Albanians.--I Pakapshem (talk) 14:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide reliable sources that address the origins of this term as a neologism and its recent development as such by modern scholars? Such would be useful here. TIA. Askari Mark (Talk) 23:09, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No need for sources for that. It has no usage and no bearing among Albanians. It's a label conceived by narrow minded foreigners.--I Pakapshem (talk) 15:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responses

Thank you for the questions Askari. I feel I have to clarify one thing before the others. Hoxha's regime and his national policy. For that I took the time to copy-edit from some scholars

Albania: from anarchy to a Balkan identity Authors Miranda Vickers, James Pettifer Edition 2, illustrated Publisher C. Hurst & Co. Publishers, 1997 ISBN 1850652902, 9781850652908 link [13]

Page 167-168-169-170

The history of the Albanian national movement is complex, but it is clear that nationalism was an underlying prop for the communist regime. One of the main reasons why a regime of such arbitrary brutality..was able to survive so long was that Hoxha had captured elements of the Albanian people's national consciousness while betraying vital elements of the national cause. The key period here is 1944-9.....when Hoxha and Tito, with their parties, evolved a solution to the Albanian question....The decision taken then were intended to give renewed permanence and legitimacy to Albania's 1913 borders and independent existence.....However during Axis occupation, another legitimacy had been established by the Italians; of a different state, a Greater Albania including much of Kosova. The fascist Italians had given the Albanians something in terms of territory which they had never been able to achieve for themselves. In the resistance struggle against Axis occupation, a central question for Albanian communists was to be the national question under a future communist regime. The party leadership was divided between them who saw the best hope for Albanian unity and prosperity in the country being part of Yugoslavia, and those favoring separatism. The split between Tito and Stalin ....safeguarded Albanian independence within the borders of 1913: it enabled Hoxha group to take unquestioned power......The close adherence of the Albanian communists to the figure of Stalin ..which guaranteed Albanian national survival originates in this period. Although these controversies may appear arcane and remote from the urgent problems of 1990's many of the post-Hoxha leaders of the state, such as Ramiz Alia....and the views of political elite on the national question have changed a little since the end of communism. There is still entrenched and widespread prejudice in much of Tirana's intellectual and political class against the national aspirations of both Kosovar and FYROM Albanians. The history of the Partisans in the North and in Macedonia and Kosovo was essentially one of difficulties and sometimes failures; the impetus for Partisan victory in the liberation war came largely from the south in Albania proper. But the Albania legitimized by Hoxha was in terms of actual territory, far for the dreams on the founding fathers of Albanian nationalism and the underlying impetus behind mythologisation of Partisan achievements during the resistance ....was the need to conceal this fact. Also mythologized was the conflict with Tito so that "the old renegate of Belgrade"...could be blamed for the communist regime failure to found a state to include all or most of Albanians living in the Balkans. In this mind set the future of Albanians outside the borders could be largely forgotten, and for fifty years families in towns near the border, like Peshkopia, could not even visit relatives a few miles away in Yugoslavia. Thus, where the national question is concerned, the communist state can be compared to someone living on a limited inheritance in a time of inflation. ....Thus there is an organic link between the decline and eventual collapse of on-party-state in 1990-91 and the reopening of the national question. Although they had been physically cut off from ALbania proper for many years, the Albanians in adjoining "Macedonia and Kosova had never lost their sense of shared national consciousness, underlined by their understanding of what was still seen as an unjust allocation of borders by the Powers in the declining years of Ottoman empire. Towns such as Diber, Gostivar and Tetovo, each with an overhelming majority of Albanian inhabitants, were and are seen by Albanians as having been traded in 1913 by the Powers to Serbia in exchange for Serbian military support in a future war and to appease Russia, regardless of the ethnicity or aspirations of the inhabitants.....The nationalist and Royalist Right have always claimed that Hoxha was in some ways a betrayer of the nation

177-78

It is uncertain whether the radicals will receive any active support from Tirana......Most well informed members of the Tirana elite only become aware of the leadership struggle within the PDP as a result of bulletins on Albanian television. Ordinary people in the provinces or countryside can have known almost nothing about what was happening.

or another source

Kosovo: how myths and truths started a war Author Julie Mertus Edition illustrated Publisher University of California Press, 1999 ISBN 0520218655, 9780520218659 link [14]

Page 38

...but it did little more to encourage Kosovo Albanians to "unite with motherland". Indeed never wanting to create tensions with Yugoslavia, Albania had even returned members of illegal Kosovar groups who had sought shelter within its borders...

• So Hoxha was in no way related to Greater Albania in any way. His main political aim was the permanence in power, thus the isolation of Albania, low profile on National question (no need to quarrel with neighbors) and the war against religion (he wanted to be the only authority, the only one to be adored) in which the moto "Don't look for churches or mosques, the religion of Albanians is Albanianism" was used by him as one of the arguments, but there were other arguments too based on marxist dogma (God does not exist, religion is bad etc). The rise of Albanian national question happened after the fall of communist regime and political Tirana had nothing to do with it neither in Kosovo nor in Macedonia. They evolved by themselves as a response to the treatment reserved to them by Serbia and Macedonia.(read the above book links for more details and the role of Tirana as an actor which was minor some even neglect it and this one for Yugoslav treatment of Albanians in Kosova [15]) which contributed to the rise of nationalism in Yugoslavia (discrimination etc simple quote form that source ...From March 1981 to November 1988 a reported 584,373 Kosova Albanians -half of the adult population-were arrested, interrogated and interned... p. 101)
• As for question number two you are correct. Shqiptaria (= Albanian nationalism?) – "the Albanian unity, the Albanian People" is the non-religious formulation of Albanian nationalism, while Shqiptarizmi (= Albanianism?) – "the Albanian national consciousness, the adoration of Albanians for their Motherland" is the anti-religious usage that predominated under Hoxha within specific context (see above for Hoxha)
• Yes there was an attempt to use Bektashi as a sort of unifying civil religion. The Bektashi religion was thought as a perfect for this purpose just because of its inter-religious tolerance and his concept of pantheism. It was propagated by on of the main figures of Albanian reinassance Naim Frashëri [16]. In fact the Bektashi order gave full support to Albanian national struggle they even dreamed of an Albanian Bektashi state in 1908 during the Jeune Turk revolution (see above link). However the idea never gained full support by Albanians. The concept of Albanianism (National identity, tolerance between religions) was more useful as a factor of unity than just another religion.
• Pan-Albanianism is a neologism a synonym of Greater Albania.[17] The term (Greater Albania) and concept was invented and used by Italians in WW2 and it was never propagated in Albania proper under communist regime (see above). The concept is still used by the Albanian neighbors, pointing to what they see as irredentist form of Albanian national question. (Serbia-Kosova issue, FYROM-Albanians issue, Greece-Chameria issue). However between Albanians themselves this concept never gained any great support (see Greater Albania article in wiki a quote "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"). So it is more a political concept and argument used by neighbors trying to oppose Albanian claims in each respective state than a political program of Albanians themselves.

- Or to put it more bluntly, our neighbors occupy the land and yet they bill us with the extremist nationalist ideology. --I Pakapshem (talk) 15:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• In no way Albanianism is synonym of Pan-Albanianism. You can be an Albanian nationalist and not opt for Pan-Albania. The above example of 96% vs. 2.5% is a clear example of that. The Albanianism after 1990 has the same concept of Romantic era. It is simply the national pride, and identity.(We may belong to different religions, but we are Albanians that is Albanianism)

Hope I was clear, feel free to ask if not:) Aigest (talk) 08:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aigest very fine, but you dont need to write your own book, explain it please with fewer words. For example, how do you believe that the lead should change? Give me your version of the lead, taking into account the present form (the lead is a good start).Alexikoua (talk) 19:50, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your responses, Aigest. I will have some further questions after I have fully digested all of this and will pose them when I get time. Askari Mark (Talk) 03:22, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can give a version for the lead after others here clarifies where this article is pointing at. The concepts are different among others as I have explained above, the main points of concern are:

• Albanian nationalism concept
• Albanianism concept
• Pan-Albanianism concept

Let's began with the more easiest one

• Pan-Albanianism is equal Greater Albania the same first reference brought by Megistias points to that "... form a 'Greater Albania'. Although considerable attention was given to pan-Albanianism in the West.." :The Balkans: A Post-Communist History by Bideleux/Jeffri, 2006, page 423, as we can see the main idea of Pan-Albanianism is to form a Greater Albania. In the actual form is like saying ...Greek nationalism or Megali Idea referes to Greek etc etc.... I am not saying that Greater Albania concept is not based in nationalistic concept environment (especially extremist one) but not in any way is a synonym of Albanianism. Moreover even the term is self-explanatory eg German vs Pan-Germanism; Serb vs Pan-Serbism etc We have the article Greater Albania and this concept may as well go there, or it can be used later in this article just like Megali Idea is used in Greek nationalism article or Greater Serbia to Serb nationalism etc just like it is as an extreme nationalistic and irredentist view. Aigest (talk) 07:26, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aigest, be frank with the man. Greater Albania and Pan-Albanianism does not exit at all. These are propagandistic terms used by Greeks and Serb in order to malign and put in a bad light normal and natural Albanian aspirations.--I Pakapshem (talk) 15:16, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, so 'pan-albanianism' is the ideology-concept that aims to Great Albania (medium vs goal). 'Albanian nationalism' is a somewhat similar (more general) concept, very nice. So, the lead needs a minor readjustment in order to mention that this term is not excactly equal.Alexikoua (talk) 07:48, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Albanianism has different meanings in English literature.

1. Among Albanians themselves and in many English published sources, albanianism is seen as a kind of national identity and pride eg "This conception was based upon two, later strongly mythologized, ideals, namely: 1. full tolerance among different religious groups; and 2. the insignificance of religion in the development of the Albanian national identity. It is important to stress that this supra-religious conceptualization of the nation can be viewed as a variation on the "Ottomans" version of citizenship introduced by Tanzimat." [18] ..So does religion matter? Whenever Albanians adress this issue it becomes a matter of pride, but also a cliche, to quote a poem of Pashko Vasa, a 19th century Catholic writer, who said that " the religion of the Albanians is Albanianism" He meant that the identity of Albanians did not derive from their religion, as it did for other peoples in Balkans. Thus the core of Serbian identity is, whether one is religious or not, entwined with Serbian Orthodox Church, just as the Greek soul, identity, and history are entwined with their church. In Bosnia, to be a bosniak means having a Muslim Background, and for Croats the Catholic church... [19] Many Albanian analysts insist that the biggest damage that communism did to Albanians not the country's economic devastation but the destruction of Albanians' national traits and dignity. These analysts are concerned not with the rise of nationalism, but with the lack of what they term "Albanianism". There appears to be a widespread decline of national pride and civic morale. Some Albanians have gone so far as to adopt foreign names and even change their religion in an attempt to gain permission to sttle in other countries. [20] Unlike Serbs, Croats, and Bosnian Muslims, whose ethnic identity is inextricably linked to their religion, Albanians are quick to point out that they are first Albanians, then Muslims or Catholics..... While an increasing number of Muslims fast during ramazan and Catholics attend church.... the first religion of Albanians is Albanianism [21] before being Moslem or Christian, Albanians are Albanians..In spite of religious difference, Albanians are not divided but united by their love between each other [22] 2.Albanianism is used by English writting sources as a synonym for Albanian nationalism. eg In the early spring of 1877, a small number of Albanians, concerned about the dangers facing Ottoman Empire, met secretly in Yanya under the leadership of Frasherli Abdul Bey, the oldest brother of Shemseddin Sami and a deputy in the Ottoman Parliament. They apparently drew up a program for the administrative autonomy of a single province of Albania as a means to preserve all lands inhabited by Albanians. Additional ideas for reform included language schools, and the restriction of military service by Albanians to Albania. This program represented the emergence of political Albanianism. Its political aim was an autonomous administration for Albania..[23] 3. Albanianism is used describing the Albanian stereotype in the West imagination eg ...Although these stereotypes are unrepresentative of majority of Albanian attitudes and practices whether within Albania or outside, they carry much responsibility for the impact of Albanianism on individual action and institutional policy. The power of such imaginery can not be ignored [24] Aigest (talk) 10:29, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Aigest. Can you also contribute on the RfC? Also, can you give us your version of the first paragraph of this article, as also Alexi asked? I personally think this article is improving (considering how it first was), not considering some POV issues that can be fixed with information like you gave. Thanks! —AnnaFabiano (talk) 11:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposals for lead

My proposal for the lead using part of the text here [25]

Albanian nationalism (sometimes referred as albanianism) originates at the time of the Russian-Turkish war (1877-78). As the Turkish Empire began to rapidly disintegrate, it became necessary for Albanians to save the regions inhabited by them, from the threat of being partitioned. At the same time there was a perceived need to differentiate Albanians from the Turkish identity.....

then we can move on with the rest of the lead. What do you think? Aigest (talk) 12:29, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think is much more informative. —AnnaFabiano (talk) 12:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is a much more correct way to start it.--Visar Arifaj (talk) 12:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

adding more

Albanian nationalism (sometimes referred as albanianism) originates at the time of the Russian-Turkish war (1877-78). As the Turkish Empire began to rapidly disintegrate, it became necessary for Albanians to save the regions inhabited by them, from the threat of being partitioned. At the same time there was a perceived need to differentiate Albanians from the Turkish identity. The concept of Albanianism develops in the same period. This conception was based upon two, later strongly mythologized, ideals, namely: 1. full tolerance among different religious groups; and 2. the insignificance of religion in the development of the Albanian national identity.

the editing numbers, commas, or any particular word may change. What do you think? Aigest (talk) 13:27, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have references that support this. —AnnaFabiano (talk) 14:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I will integrate all below:

Albanian nationalism (sometimes referred as albanianism) originates at the time of the Russo-Turkish War (1877–1878). As the Ottoman Empire began to rapidly disintegrate, it became necessary for Albanians to save the regions inhabited by them, from the threat of being partitioned. At the same time there was a perceived need to differentiate Albanians from the Turkish identity.(reference: Albanian identities: myth and history Authors Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers, Bernd Jürgen Fischer Editors Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers, Bernd Jürgen Fischer Edition illustrated Publisher C. Hurst & Co. Publishers, 2002 ISBN 1850655723, 9781850655725 page 91 link here [26]) The concept of Albanianism develops in the same period. This conception was based upon two, later strongly mythologized, ideals, namely: 1. full tolerance among different religious groups; and 2. the insignificance of religion in the development of the Albanian national identity. (reference: Discourses of collective identity in Central and Southeast Europe (1770-1945): texts and commentaries Volume 1 of Discourses of Collective Identity in Central Europe Series ISBN 9637326510, 9789637326516 Authors Balázs Trencsényi, Michal Kopeček Editors Balázs Trencsényi, Michal Kopeček Publisher Central European University Press, 2006 ISBN 9637326529, 9789637326523 page 120 link [27])

What do you think? Aigest (talk) 14:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For me, it is OK! —AnnaFabiano (talk) 14:48, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aigist, you are expanding the 'history section' with all this? Why not think simple? begin with the lead please. Suppose all 3 concepts you mention are included.

Pan-Albanianism is equal Greater Albania? What kind of low level english is that? The first is a concept/ideology the second a region or else the (main) goal that this ideology aims to at its present form. It is clear that 'Albanian nationalism' has a more general meaning than that of G. A. (ideology vs goal).

What I conclude, is that the article needs c-e, because the meaning becomes somewhat complicated here. Alexikoua (talk) 16:32, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. But, Albanian nationalism (as this page is called) does not refer only to theories and ideologies cemented during communism (as it is implied in the article). Albanian nationalism is a more broader concept. Don't you agree? —AnnaFabiano (talk) 16:42, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I heard things like "albanian nationalist theories and ideologies cemented during communism" I can't help but laugh.--I Pakapshem (talk) 18:57, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thinks that can be improved with some copy-editing I Pakapshem. But what is important right now is the basic purpose of the page, this page is created to inform people in an encyclopedic manner about Albanian nationalism as a whole. Though, the current form is better somehow, it seems that we are still pushing it towards a "general concept of nationalistic ideologies among a part of ethnic Albanian communities", when it actually includes more than that (it includes Albanian renaissance and nationalistic pride also). —AnnaFabiano (talk) 19:06, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose of this page is clear Anna. As we say in Albania, you can't cover the sun with a sift. It is not to inform people in an encyclopedic manner about Albanian nationalism, but rather misinform them through rhetoric, propaganda, half truths and information thrown together in order to give people the specific view Megistias and others have in mind.--I Pakapshem (talk) 20:54, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alexikoua, the lead does need some more explanation. We had all that discussion only about the terms that are used in the current lead (Albanian nationalism, albanianism and pan-albanianism). As it has been well pointed out the three of them don’t refer to the same thing, it is necessary to have a better explanation in the lead. From the existing version, the reader can very easily make wrong assumptions about the Albanian Nationalism.

I think the version by Aigest gives a much clearer introduction and doesn’t leave as much room for confusion.

... ultimately, 150 years can barely count as history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Visar arifaj (talk • contribs) 19:12, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why dont give a lead example too? Aigest? Aigest didn't give a lead example yet, but a historical background.Alexikoua (talk) 09:03, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is what I suggest:

Albanian nationalism is a broad complex concept^[1][2] that refers to ideologies linked with Albanian national identity. It is sometimes also associated with concepts like Albanianism[1][2][3][4][5] and Pan-Albanianism[6][7]. Albanian nationalism emerged from the middle of 19th century as a national movement, and has since then developed into different political movements and ideas most notably in Albania, Kosovo and Macedonia.

The last sentence could be formulated better. But I would say not to add other information, everything else is inside the text. What do you think? —Anna Comnena 17:30, 12 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by AnnaFabiano (talk • contribs)

Its fine as it is ,19th century nationalism is not really relevant here, modern type hardcore nationalism was born in Communist Albania and has reached its Zenith in our days by claiming everything in sight.Megistias (talk) 17:55, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lead:

• Albanian nationalism is a broad complex concept...:of what? the introductory phrase needs to be more focus on the field it has to describe, too general and fogue, maybe broad concept of nationlist...somewhat
• ...that refers to ideologies linked with Albanian national identity: Needs to be somewhat more focused, the title is about nationlism, and related ideologies, policies.
• ...Albania, Kosovo and Macedonia: why only there? there are for sure Albanian communities in other countries that adopt that ideologies, right?
• Agree with the rest. Seems we agree on more that 50% about the lead.

Aegis in order to make your arguments clear and not complicated do not write your own book in here, try to be laconic. How about making a lead example to?Alexikoua (talk) 12:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Than maybe we should make a separate page Albanian hardcore nationalism. —Anna Comnena (talk) 19:29, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that the current article deals mainly with a current concept, how about -Nationalism in Post-communist Albania.?Alexikoua (talk) 21:07, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think Megistias' post above clarifies a major issue that lies at the root of all the contention here. Megistias appears to feel he has been developing an article on "present-day" Albanian nationalism; this is highlighted in his statement "19th century nationalism is not really relevant here, modern type hardcore nationalism [is]." Most everyone else is taking the article – which is titled simply "Albanian nationalism" – as meaning the article is intended to address the full scope of the subject. Frankly, I have to agree with the consensus that it should address the full topic. Alexikoua identifies an obvious solution in suggesting a renaming to "Nationalism in post-communist Albania". Personally, I think this approach is premature, though, since there is not already an article that addresses the general topic in the first place. If the current "general-coverage" article should grow unwieldy, that might be a reasonable option, but at this point in time, it would just look like a content fork. Askari Mark (Talk) 23:25, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion here would be as follows: there should be a page (as Alexikoua also suggests) about "Nationalism in (post) communist Albania" and another page "Albanian Nationalism" that refers to the general term although there is no official definition of it. I think it would be a good idea to split the two as they don't represent each other that much. The general modern nationalism amongst Albanians is still not clear what it is (and it differs from the parts they are from) should be a separate page that explains it all: from the end of the 19th century, independence of Albania, the world wars and the different scenarios from all the Albanian inhibited regions (as they all differed from each other).

I agree that it would be a good solution to move this article to "Nationalism in (post) communist Albania" and leave "Albanian Nationalism" as an article that would address all Albanian Nationalism from its roots to all its forms that might have developed through the last century until now. --Visar Arifaj (talk) 01:08, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

19th nationalism is diferrent than the current nationalistic movements. Please read nationalism. The concept isn't the same, ideas change during the ages and that's reasonable.Alexikoua (talk) 01:03, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, there is no proof that identifies today's nationalism amongst Albanians to a different goal of that of the late 19th century. In fact there is no proof that there is any unified ideology amongst the contemporary Albanians for any nationalist movement. That is why I find it reasonable to have a different article about Nationalism during Hoxha and another one that refers to the general term of "Albanian Nationalism".

Yet again, I too here am trying to find a way to generalize the concept but it is very difficult because officially there isn't one. I'm trying to find something that unifies all the ideas from all the nationalist ideas that have existed so that we can fit them in a general presentation.--Visar Arifaj (talk) 01:15, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is these differences in which Albanian nationalism has changed over time that recommend to me that there be a general overview article. Something needs to provide the context that there indeed have been major changes over time. Please remember that WP articles are mostly intended for those who know little or nothing on the subject. Should there also be separate articles on each of the major evolutions of Albanian nationalism? Certainly, if there is sufficient material available for such articles – which I deem there is – but I don't believe such a collection of separate articles adequately substitutes for a single summary-style article on such a complex topic. Askari Mark (Talk) 20:00, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. For the moment we can make this the only page on Albanian nationalism. But with general material (not focusing only on one period or idea), and maybe with a section for each. The only challenge now seems to be the other Albanian nationalism page Albanian nationalism and independence. Should we merge these two, and make a separate page Nationalism in Post-communist Albania like Alexi proposed? —Anna Comnena (talk) 21:11, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article should stay as it is -proposing General material to replace this is nationalist advocating and an attempt to hide things under the rag.When one thinks of Albanian nationalism it thinks of what the article states not of 19th century birth of nations nationalism.Someone that knows nothing should learn these things as they are the essence of Albanian nationalism.

• Merging or splitting will destroy it
• 19thcentury nationalism for Albanians has been displaced today due to the historical events that have transpired to Albanian nationalism of the type we read in the article.Megistias (talk) 21:47, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Megistias, only people who have a view on Albanians could think that Albanian nationalism is linked to just one idea or theory as you said When one thinks of Albanian nationalism it thinks of what the article states not of 19th. We do not want to give a view on Albanian nationalism. We want the whole thing. Nobody is saying to replace any material. The idea is to give all the views and theories on Albanian nationalism, not just ONE. —Anna Comnena (talk) 23:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is solid and referenced .Megistias (talk) 23:46, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Megistias, can you please stop pushing this. Everyone has stated their case and finally we are getting at a common ground. This page has allot of useful information, in fact I can help you on Albanian nationalist newspapers that are published today. But first let's find a way how to handle all this. I proposed this page get merged with Albanian Renaissance with most of the information in it. Other material that you called hardcore nationalism can go more detailed in another page that Alexi proposed be called "Nationalism in Post-communist Albania". The first page will remain the main page of Albanian nationalism (all forms of it) the second will only denote modern day nationalism. What do you say? —Anna Comnena (talk) 00:08, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Putting Albanian FP inside this article is tendentious. It connotes that Albanian FP is nationalistic. On the other side, the information that is in it doesn't have anything to do with Albanian nationalism. —AnnaFabiano (talk) 21:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that including FP material here is contentious so much as it is superfluous. There are whole series of "X–Y relations" articles (e.g., Albanian–Turkish relations, Albanian–Croatian relations, Albanian–Serbian relations, etc.) – cf. Foreign relations of Albania. At best these might be summarized here, with respect only to the impact (if any) of Albanian nationalism on relations with Albania's neighbors; however, care should be taken that this does not end up falling afoul of WP:UNDUE. Askari Mark (Talk) 23:44, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The FP should stay as it helps in being objective.It exhibits that despite inherited and current nationalism the Albanian politics are are the linked articles state.When someone ignorant of the subject reads this he should have the chance to see Albanian FP .Its basic.Megistias (talk) 21:42, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With that logic we can also add Albanian sport, Albanian music, Albanian art, Albanian cuisine... —Anna Comnena (talk) 23:06, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The view that Pelasgians were the ancestor of Albanians was the dominate view of 19th century. This view maintained that Pelasgians were the ancestors of Illyrians Macadonians and Epirotes. It was claimed by Hahn and boosted the national pride, "Who are we Albanians?" -"We are the descendants of Pelasgians the most ancient etc..."

In the midth-nineteenth century the area had attracted the interest of foreign scholars, most notably F. Bopp, who first argued that Albanian was an Indo-European language and the Austrian J. G. Hahn, generally regarded as the father of Albanology, who produced a grammar, a vocabolary, and a collection of folclore. By the end of the century was established that "the Albanians were descendants of a great and ancient Indo-European people in the Balkans" This heritage played the same role in boosting national pride among Albanian intellectuals as did the similar links to the classical past among the Greeks and Romanians. Subsequently the study of Albanian history, language and folclore became popular, particularly among the Albanians in Italy. p. 225 The establishment of the Balkan national states, 1804-1920 Volume 8 of A History of East Central Europe Author Barbara Jelavich Edition reprint, illustrated Publisher University of Washington Press, 1986

This romantic view of Pelasgian origin continued among Albanian intellectuals even in the first half of the XXth century. That view was left somewhat aside during communist regime, whose efforts were more focused in proving that Albanians descended from Illyrians. In fact during that period no study or scholar publication linking directly Pelasgians and Albanians was made by Albanian linguists or archaeologists. All efforts and funds of Albanian linguists and archaeologists were concentrated on Illyrians.

On the Greek side, the Pelasgic theory was at first used to facilitate the incorporation of all Albanians (and other inhabitants of the Balkans) into the Greek national projects as common descendants of the Pelasgians; this theory was at first welcome by some Greek educated Albanian intellectuals (Sigalas 1999: 62-85). On the Albanian side, it supported the claim of priority and ownership of Albanians on the territories they inhabited. These ideas however were later criticized by scholars from socialist Albania and the Pelasgians were forgotten or at least left aside official history: as a theory promoted for political reasons by 19th century intellectuals, it served to establish the ancient and autochthonous character of Albanians in answer to Greek and Serbian claims on Albanian inhabited regions, but it was not at all scientifically grounded and for that reason could not be defended against contemporary theories on extra-European origin of the Albanians (Buda 1977: 27). Although Enver Hoxha himself supported the Pelasgic theory in his own writings (Cabanes 2004: 119), the directions he gave to Albanian archaeologists in the 1960s focused on the Illyrians and on the Illyrian-Albanian continuity. As a result, studies on the origin of Illyrians and Albanians published at that time do not even mention the Pelasgians.....The official history inherited from the communist period states that modern Albanians descend from the Illyrians, an ancient population living in Western Balkans, north of the Greek world. A large part of the historians‟ and anthropologists‟ task was to demonstrate the continuity from Illyrians to modern Albanians and also to assert the specificity of Illyrians – as different from Greeks – and the existence of a clear boundary between the two populations (Cabanes 1988,Cabanes 2004). Such a conception of the past, which became dominant in the 1960s (Korkuti, Anamali and Gjinari 1969 Korkuti, Anamali & Gjinari 1969) strengthened the idea of an ancient and autochthonous Albaniannation and was legitimising the existence of the international border in the present... Anthropological Journal of European Cultures, 2009 PELASGIC ENCOUNTERS IN THE GREEK-ALBANIAN BORDERLAND Border Dynamics and Reversion to Ancient Past in Southern Albania Gilles de Rapper [28]

In post-communism there were published some materials (mostly of amateurish origin) who try to make direct link between Albanians and Pelasgians, making assumptions in interpretation of ancient texts and some amateurish linguistic arguments of the type Athina~E Thëna (Alb)(knowledge, premeditated, what was to be etc). As it is the case this views were criticized by serious Albanian linguists such as Demiraj.

The translation of d'Angély's book in 1998 was probably a turning point in the rediscovery of Pelasgians in Albania...The renewed interest for Pelasgic theories in the late 1990s and in the 2000s was largely influenced by Robert d‟Angély‟s book published in France at the beginning of the 1990s and partly translated in Albanian in 1998 (d'Angély 1990-1991; d'Angely 1998)...In 2002, another important book was translated from Greek: Aristides Kollias‟ Arvanites and the Origin of Greeks, first published in Athens in 1983 and reedited several times since then (Kollias 1983, Kolia 2002)....More recently, Mathieu Aref‟s book on Albania, or the Incredible Odyssey of a Pre-Hellenic People was also translated and widely commented (Aref 2003, Aref 2007)....Recent publications on the Pelasgians, though often presented as innovative, generally rely on 19th century Pelasgic theories which they contribute to revitalise. Direct references to the 19th century authors are however rare, as if the negative image that was imposed on them in the socialist period was still devaluating their work. In this context, the relations between the old Pelasgic theories and the new ones rely mainly on the translation of books published in foreign languages at various time....It should be noted that the Illyrian thesis is still supported by Albanian scholars as the only scientifically grounded theory. Indeed, the Pelasgic „theories‟ do not resist any critical assessment based on historical, archaeological or linguistic evidence and they are strongly criticised by many professional historians and linguists (Demiraj 2008), for whom the main issue is still the documentation of Illyrian-Albanian continuity. Anthropological Journal of European Cultures, 2009 PELASGIC ENCOUNTERS IN THE GREEK-ALBANIAN BORDERLAND Border Dynamics and Reversion to Ancient Past in Southern Albania Gilles de Rapper [29]

So the case of Pelasgians and the position of Albanian scholars view is clear, moreover during communist regime. Aigest (talk) 10:05, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As for the etruscans the first theory was proposed by Zacharian in the begining of XXth century linked Pelasgians with etruscans, thus Albanians came in scene, later Nermin Vlora Nermin Vlora Falaschi. L'Etrusco lingua viva Roma : Bardi, 1989 linked Etruscans with Albanians but just like in the first case these were amateurish things. Just like the Pelasgian case Albanian communist regime didn't approved them, moreover they didn't have the same "support" in publications like Pelasgians after 1990' Aigest (talk) 10:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Albanian state and the Albanian schoolbooks support Illyrian - Pelasgian issues and so on claims.State funded and supported.Right now in Albanian schools.Megistias (talk) 10:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you shows us these Albanian schoolbooks and curriculums for Albanian schools?--I Pakapshem (talk) 15:38, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure, where did you get this claim since the above article is of 2009? Aigest (talk) 10:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again you attempt to diver attention to the 19th century.This is about now.Megistias (talk) 10:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you answer my direct question regarding your claim? Aigest (talk) 10:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can see the references in the article, i am not going to repeat myself.Megistias (talk) 10:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which one because the above article does not say that, moreover it says that "It should be noted that the Illyrian thesis is still supported by Albanian scholars as the only scientifically grounded theory." Aigest (talk) 10:41, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean this In the mid-1990s, Pelasgians appeared sporadically in the newspapers and history schoolbooks published in 1994-1995 already mentioned Pelasgians as the most ancient population of the Balkans and Asia Minor. They were presented as an Indo- European population, whose language was not Greek and who preceded Illyrians in Albania. Schoolbooks however differ on what they assert on the relation between Pelasgians and Illyrians: the latter are sometimes said to be the heirs of the former, especially with regard to their language (Kuri, Zekolli & Jubani 1995: 32-33), but there is generally no assertion of direct continuity between Pelasgians and Illyrians. Why this reference is used as WP:TE?

In the meantime the other reference points to this [30] a book on business&economics, surely no WP:RS in this case. Not in the topic, not authorities in the area etc..accepting them as e ref is just like accepting Matheiu Aref work on Pelasgians. Aigest (talk) 11:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I mean the relevant ones in the article.You can read them without me pasting them here.Megistias (talk) 14:17, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The future of Southeast Europe: towards European integration" is directly related here.Albanian is supposed to be integrated into Europe in a number of "levels".The reference is reliable.Megistias (talk) 14:18, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The book deals with social-economic facts, we can not avoid it. Moreover I see that the publisher is quite reliable and expert on the field (economic and social aspects are tightly connected, if you mean that a work on finance is irrelevand with society, especially if we deal with present issues). Alexikoua (talk) 14:37, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Social issues are directly correlated with nationalismMegistias (talk) 14:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me see if I get this right, economical aspects are connected tightly with social ones, and social aspects are connected with nationalism - so we deduce, economic aspects must be connected with nationalism. <sarcasm>Same goes with sport: sport is tightly connected with business, business is connected with economy, economy is connected with social issues, social issues with nationalism - thus sport is connected with nationalism</sarcasm>. This same pattern can be used with other concepts and words. You can try "tomato"? —Anna Comnena (talk) 16:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure the book on economics is not a WP:RS source, otherwise we can use travel guide books which "prove" that Alexander the Great was Albanian, or Macedonian, or Greek depends on the country it is published. And Travel guides are linked directly with territory and related history surely more than economic books.

What I am concerned more is WP:TE here especially by Megistias. Although the references speak clearly (see above) his first version was that "Albanian nationalism or Albanianism[1][2][3][4][5] or Pan-Albanianism[6][7] refers to nationalist Albanian ideology and theories that were cemented during Communist Albania", while sources speak very clear regarding communist regime in Albania, which didn't support neither Great Albania, nor Pelasgians even more Etruscans or Greeks in Albanian heritage. That's why I am dubious on its editing and I am forced to copy here the full text of the references, so everyone can judge. Aigest (talk) 06:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greek sources are not reliable on this subject since Greece has an interest in such an organization existing, in order for it to undermine the Cham unresolved issue and have it look as if it's a cause that has extremist irredentist proponents. You need to show proof of the UCC existing from a neutral source, or otherwise that section will have to go.--I Pakapshem (talk) 18:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about Vickers? Is she reliable?Alexikoua (talk) 18:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Show me where Vickers confirms without doubt the existence of the UCC.--I Pakapshem (talk) 18:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The contemporary Greek press has also published accounts about the clandestine activities of a "Chameria Liberation Front". The first of these appeared almost a year before Ahmeti's supposed statement, when a report by the newspaper Tipos tis Kiriakis (9 July 2000) claimed that a new Liberation Army of Chameria (UCC - Ushtria Clirimtare Chameria) had been formed in Albania, and had already finished two large manoeuvres. The article described the UCC as an offshoot of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), and a logical extension of the ethnic Albanian guerrilla groups that had sprung up in southern Serbia - the Liberation Army of Preshevo, Medveje and Bujanovac (UCPMB) and the National Liberation Army (NLA) in FYROM. The article claimed that the UCC's plans for Greece were decided in November 1999, at a conference held in the Gjakova district of southern Kosovo, at which it was decided to set up the first brigade of the 'Chameria Liberation Army'.

Part of what Vickers says on the UCC. As you can see the part in bold, Vickers clearly specifies that it is the greek press that is making these allegations. The UCC section needs to go immediately.--I Pakapshem (talk) 18:44, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory R. Copley,THE ROAD TO PEACE IN THE BALKANS IS PAVED WITH BAD INTENTIONS,Washington, DC, June 27, 2007,"What we saw with the Bush visit to Tirana was the emergence of the Albanian thrust — supported by both the Government of Albania and the KLA — of an Albanian sponsored group, the UCC,4 seeking secession for part of Greece, Epirus, known historically also as Chameria. The Cham people draw, to some extent, their identity from a community formed in the Epirus area of Greece by the Roman Army some two millennia ago. The reality today, however, is that the Chameria Liberation Army — the UCC — was formed by the KLA and is in fact a part of the quest for a “Greater Albania”, and its proponents have said as much.A delegation of the UCC on June 10, 2007, delivered a letter to President Bush during his visit to Tirana. The UCC letter referred to the existence of an Albanian minority in Western Greece (Epirus) and the UCC requested recognition of the “genocide of the Albanian Chamerians” allegedly conducted by the Greeks in the end of World War II, and to recognize “the right of the people to return to their homes in Greece from where they were expelled”, and “return their estate that was attached”,plus other nationalist requests.And a few weeks before President Bush’s arrival in Albania, UCC delegations delivered letters to the US embassies in Rome and Tirana. Albanian nationalist sentiment and protests increased, along with strong propaganda against the Greek minority in southern Albania, after the Bush visit to Tirana. The UCC, meanwhile, has been building its support base with demonstrations and events leading toward today — June 27, 2007 — the date that the Albanian Parliament in 1994 called the “Chameria national anniversary”. The presence of President Bush in Albania, then, and his statements supporting the independence of Kosovo, encouraged and triggered the extreme feelings of nationalist Albanians, who are also seeking independence in western FYROM, and the Greek region of Epirus. Indeed, the Albanian people have for decades, but increasingly in the past 15 or so years, been so distracted by leaders who have promised that they could, and should, have some of their neighbors’ wealth, that they have allowed those leaders to fail them in actually creating wealth and strength in Albania itself."Megistias (talk) 20:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What crap, and what's worse is that this Copley character doesn't even back up his crap. He just makes of the wall statemets, like the UCC send a letter to Bush and to US embasiess in Rome and Tirana. He doesn't prove anywhere any of this is true, nor does he prove that the UCC exists. He just makes statetments (very ridiculous ones) whithout backing any of them with any proof whatsoever. Not even an ounce of credibility here. You're going to have to try harder than that Megistias, or as I said the section goes.--I Pakapshem (talk) 21:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well cursing and swearing doenst change the fact that the sources are reliable.Megistias (talk) 21:08, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, where does Copley back up his claims? Where does Copley prove that the UCC exists? Adding anything you find in google as a source and calling it reliable does not make it reliable. Find something reliable or the section goes.--I Pakapshem (talk) 21:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is a reliable source.Megistias (talk) 21:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is 0 reliable. Nowhere does it prove the existence of the UCC. If you don't have anything better, tomorrow the section goes.--I Pakapshem (talk) 21:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think you're in the position to make such declaration, especially when sources are being presented before you. Our aim is to improve this article, and source citation is a certain path towards this.--Michael X the White (talk) 21:43, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What sources? Articles from the greek press? Off the wall statements without any proof? Until now, neither Megistias or anybody else has been able to prove the existence of the UCC, so yes I am in a position to make such declarations until a source that clearly proves the existence of the UCC is brought. If not, the section goes. --I Pakapshem (talk) 21:48, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well Greek press and mainly Gregory R. Copley is a sourceMegistias (talk) 21:54, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greek press is obivously NPOV and both it and Copley speculate and don't have any proof whatsoever of the UCC's existence.--I Pakapshem (talk) 21:57, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is your personal opinion and it does not render the sources inertMegistias (talk) 21:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is not my personal opinion, but this what any logical person can deduce by reading the paragraph above. Section goes by tomorrow if you don't have any reliable sources.--I Pakapshem (talk) 22:08, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1 Gregory Copley is President of the International Strategic Studies Association (ISSA), based in Washington, DC, and also chairs the Association’s Balkans & Eastern Mediterranean Policy Council (BEMPC). He is also Editor of Defense & Foreign Affairs publications,and the Global Information System (GIS), a global intelligence service which provides strategic current intelligence to governments worldwide. He is a founding Director of Future Directions International (FDI), the Australian strategic research institution, based in Perth. Mr. Copley is author of numerous books on strategic issues and history, including the recent book published by Simon & Schuster, The Art of Victory. In the latest of a series of awards, he was made a Member of the Order of Australia in the Queen’s Birthday Honours List of June 11, 2007, for his contributions to strategic philosophy. His Washington-based institute has for more than three decades worked on issues related to terrorism, psychological strategy and grand strategy issues, as well as intelligence. He advises a number of governments, often at head-of-state level, on these issues.Megistias (talk) 22:09, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you try and find something credible by tomorrow and not waste your time with Copley.--I Pakapshem (talk) 22:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The UCC section is fine, but the link with KLA is a really big allegation. You can not base that only on such a reference (no matter how famous the author is, he is not an authority on the above-mentioned issue). I would suggest to remove it for the moment, until more strong references are found. —Anna Comnena (talk) 22:51, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He is a solid and appropriate reference.Megistias (talk) 23:05, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia rules clearly state "Exceptional claims require exceptional sources" Wikipedia:SOURCES#Sources and Wikipedia:UNDUE#Undue_weight. Let's remove it until there is a stronger reference. —Anna Comnena (talk) 23:12, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He advises a number of governments, often at head-of-state level, on these issues

• Thats an exceptional sourceMegistias (talk) 23:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a guy who also says:

• "...creation of what is already a criminal sub-state in Kosovo..."
• "US State Department says that the case of Kosovo is sui generis... [That is] Vain, arrogant, wishful thinking."
• "US policies toward the region [Balkans]... ...have been crude, ill-considered..."
• "...and despite the proven links between Bosnian terrorism cells and the 9/11 attackers and even to the Madrid bombers..."
• He uses terms like "the so-called “Global War on Terror”..."

This guy has clearly an extreme POV. If we would use him as a reference everywhere, we would solve many problems like "Give Kosovo and Metohija back to Serbia", "Macedonia would stop existing", "US State Department would "stop working against US and Western interests"..." and other similar reliable claims. —Anna Comnena (talk) 23:49, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is called a straw man argument. He says none of the above. These are wild exaggerations. He is mildly critical of US foreign policy in the Balkans and not an uncritical supporter of Kosovar independence. Extreme POV? Hardly. His credentials are moreover highly impressive. Much more so than, say, I don't know, Noel Malcolm. --Athenean (talk) 00:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me just cite some parts from the actual document by Gregory R. Copley 'THE ROAD TO PEACE IN THE BALKANS IS PAVED WITH BAD INTENTIONS' that is being referred:

• "As a result, not only Kosovo, but all of Albania and other Balkan communities have become captive of the criminal-political movements which owe their power to their alliance with al-Qaida, Iran, and the Saudi-funded Wahhabist movements."
• "The Kosovo region is now a lawless area. It has been ethnically-cleansed of Serbs (more than 300,000 in the past five years), and re-populated by Albanians who have progressively and illegally, over the past decades, migrated into the area."
• "The visit to Tirana by US President Bush signaled the start of an open season of expanded Albanian-backed terrorist and political activities in the region..."
• His second conclusion: "As a result of the encouragement given to the Albanian expansionist cause, there will be continued dynamism in Albanian separatist, terrorist, and agitation movements throughout the Balkans, and a renewed confidence and vitality to Albanian criminal activities in narco-trafficking, human trafficking, and illegal arms trade through Europe"

Is that what you call mild criticism?

I am not surprised by his points of view that he "serves as a visiting professor and lecturer at a number of institutions around the world, currently including the European Cultural Centre, of Delphi, Greece; the University of Belgrade; Intercollege, in Nicosia, Cyprus..."[31]

Oh, and this is how this information is backed up: "Note by author: This paper draws on a wide range of current and historical intelligence reporting, but, for the sake of brevity, it is not possible to cite all these, and all historical sources. What is presented are the conclusions and trend projections based on analysis of the source material based on some two decades of close involvement in Balkan, South-Eastern European, and related developments." (Not to mention that half of the references he cites are from Defense & Foreign Affairs publications which he himself is the Editor-in-Chief of).

Now, here's the funny part: On page 8, where he suggests a solution for the name of Macedonia (the country), "... perhaps it is worth investigating whether the FYROM region should resume its historical legitimate name, Dardania[10]. This was the name of the region until 1900." Not only is it historically incorrect but take a look at his reference:

"[10] Significantly, Wikipedia describes Dardania as an ancient country encompassing southern parts of present-day Serbia (including the area of the modern-day province of Kosovo), mostly, but not entirely, western parts of the present-day FYROM, and parts of present-day north-eastern Albania."

and guess who wrote the WP article on Dardania (Europe)? So much for those highly impressive credentials...

--Visar Arifaj (talk) 05:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, let me guess! Could it be Megistias, Alexi, Athenian (and others)? —Anna Comnena (talk) 11:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the new evidence that Visar and Anna brought on the Copley character and given what I've said above about the sources being pure speculation and push a specific POV, the section on UCC will go until reliable sources are presented that clearly prove its existence.--I Pakapshem (talk) 15:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Megistias, you don't own the article. Reference is totally unreliable.--I Pakapshem (talk) 16:04, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Magistias you have to stop. It seems that all other editors on this page who are non-Greek don't have the right to edit. Why don't you add all this "priceless" information on Greek nationalism. BTW do you have a certain fetish towards Albanians? —Anna Comnena (talk) 16:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory R. Copley advises heads of state , he is a reliable source on this issue and its that simple.Denial does not render his inert.Megistias (talk) 16:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your arguments are starting to sound like those of a petulant child who closes his ears and yells when he doesn't agree with anything. Him advising heads of state does not make him reliable. Look at what he says. Plenty of people advise heads of state, however that does not make them reliable or absolute authorities on anything. If anything many advisors are as unreliable as a source can get. Anna, not only does Megistias have a fetish towards Albanians, but also all the greek editors you see around as well and in particular Athenean and Alexikoua who seem like have put all Albanian articles on their watch list and don't do anything but edit them to push their nationalistic point of view.--I Pakapshem (talk) 16:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And you won't get anywhere by reverting our edits back, because we can sit all day and do the same thing.--I Pakapshem (talk) 16:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean with ideology? Albanian nationalist ideology and historical revisionist ideology are both used in the text. However keeping in mind that the ideology is set of ideas proposed by the dominant class of a society to all members of this society and seeing that neither the state nor scholars (in general as can be seen in the full text above) support any ideology in that direction (Unless we can put illyrians case in ideology, but again that is again dubious since the majority of scholars outside Albania support this view) I am confused by the term used. There is a big difference between ideas, ideology, myths etc all these words have different meanings. Aigest (talk) 12:02, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reference speaks clearly "These ideas however were later criticized by scholars from socialist Albania and the Pelasgians were forgotten or at least left aside official history" do you guys read that? Aigest (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aigest: De-Rapper says: "Although Enver Hoxha himself supported the Pelasgic theory in his own writings, the directions he gave to Albanian archaeologists at the end of the ‘60s focused on the Illyrians and on the Illyrian-Albanian continuity..." what are you deleting? Suppose you are not serious, and your blind undo activity is really unacceptable. De Rapper is one of the speciallist in current social topics. Read it please first. See also:

• ...The officialhistory inherited from the communist period states that modern Albanians descend from the Illyrians, an ancient population living in Western Balkans, north of the Greek world. Alarge part of the historians’ and anthropologists’ task was to demonstrate the continuityfrom Illyrians to modern Albanians and also to assert the specificity of Illyrians – different...
• ...thePelasgians are the ancestors of all Europeans, but only Albanians are their direct and

authentic descendants....

• Although Enver Hoxha himself supported the Pelasgic theory in his ownwritings, the directions he gave to Albanian archaeologists at the end of the ‘60s focused onthe Illyrians and on the Illyrian-Albanian continuity (Cabanes 2004: 119)...
• The Pelasgians are nonetheless coming back today. Lots of publications by amateur historians arerevitalising the Pelasgic theory, sometimes relying on works published outside Albania,such as Robert d’Angely’s or Mathieu Aref’s books (d’Angely 1998, published in French in1990-1991; Aref 2003, Albanian translation published in 2007). 2 In these theories, modernAlbanians are direct descendants, through the Illyrians, of the ancient Pelasgians,considered as the founders of the most ancient civilisation in Europe.

Its more than clear I believe, plz read de_Rapper and Cabanes first first.Alexikoua (talk) 12:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do I have to remind you Alex that this is strictly regarding communist regime era, not other times you are mentioning above? I have read them and also the passages you are leaving out. None is denying if we may call the Pelasgomania of amateurs after 1990's, but during communist regime that was not the case and that's what De-Rapper says "These ideas however were later criticized by scholars from socialist Albania and the Pelasgians were forgotten or at least left aside official history" So no Pelasgians no Etruscians no Ancient Greeks in official books, while for Greater Albania ideology during communist regime see Vickers and others cited above by me Aigest (talk) 13:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

de_Rapper says about ideologies and concepts adopted during communism- and exactly says that Hodja gave directions to adopt a direct Illyrian-Albanian approach. Why was it left aside? It seems there is the opposite.Alexikoua (talk) 13:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mix illyrians with all above, while Albanian - Illyrian connection is widely held by scholars outside Albania (see Britanica online for eg on Albania [32] and Illyria [33]) this is not the case on others. If we are to speak for the group of ideologies such as Greater Albania or hypothesis like Pelasgians etc this were left aside by communist regime. Illyrian thesis has scientific bases and has such is different from the others. Every state has invested on archaeology and yes the focus of Albanian archaeology during Communist regime was on Illyrians, but this was not the case for the others. All other nationalistic ideologies or myths mentioned in the article were left aside. Aigest (talk) 13:48, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The references are clear on this.The Albanian state has a specific policy on claiming Ancient Greeks,Pelasgians and mixing Illyrians in the "pot".Trying to nit-pick wont cut it.Megistias (talk) 16:19, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]