Talk:Igoumenitsa

The name issue

I have edited the formerly cham inhabited places with albnaian names in the lead, along with their greek form. The reason I edited them is WP:NCGN which states that "Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted". The sources we have shows that there was a minority in the towns and villages, so there is "a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place". It is the same reason that the names are used in Vlora, Berat, Durres, etc, were no greeks live, but there was a ancient greek colony in there. So we shopuld start a disccusion in order to find a solution, avoiding double standards. balkanian (talk) 12:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The Cham presence is not sufficiently notable to include the Albanian toponyms here per WP:NCGN. The Chams were a minority in all these places, never a majority. Also the wording is very Albano-POV. If you say "The area was home to Cham Albanians that were expelled" 1) That creates that all the inhabitants were Cham, when in fact the Chams were a minority in all these places, and 2) it creates the imperssion that they are innocent victims, which is Albanian POV. If you are going to mention that the Chams were expelled, you HAVE to mention why they were expelled (collaborating with Nazis). Otherwise, you can't mention that they were "expelled". --Athenean (talk) 13:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, firstly lets start a conversation about the name. The sentence about their presenced I agree that should be reworded, but lats discuss that later. About the name, in parapotamos, igoumenitsa, maragiriti and parga they were the majority, please see the reference of miranda vickers. But, even if they were a minority, WP:NCGN, does not state that they should be majority in order to add their name. Secondly, there still lives a population in Epirus (see Helsinki Report), which speak albanian (they call that shqip not arvanitika). so the name should be added.balkanian (talk) 13:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

[www.greekhelsinki.gr/english/reports/arvanites.html the greek helsinki committee raport]balkanian (talk) 13:28, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The Miranda Vickers source doesn't help very much, it's basically a description of the modern dispute with little information of the past, it doesn't state any figures either apart from the 14.000 that live in Saranda, no evidence as to whether Chams were a historical majority in any place. Not much about the history of the region in general. Another thing is how much credibility we should give to an article that is published by a military college. The wiki articles of the cities and towns in Albania you are referring to have an extensive and properly sourced history section as Ioannina or Epirus (region). Anyway i can see that in Durres for example there is a same problem, the arguement for the deletion of the Greek name there is that it is not officially recognized by the state although its history is clearly documented. I see no reason not to add the names the Turkish and Jewish populations also used following the same wikipedia policies. As for the modern Albanian speaking element in Epirus in Cham Albanians there's a source that states that if they exist at all they are very hard to find. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zakronian (talk • contribs) 17:10, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

It is the same as Himara,Vlora, Berat etc. If you do not put the Albanian name, than we should take off the Greek names on the Albanian cities.--Taulant23 (talk) 21:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The Greek names in those articles are mentioned in the history sections anyway. It's simple, provide reliable sources that there was a significant presence of Albanians, either in size or of historical importance in general, in the places in question and add the names. What don't you understand ??? I am repeating, Ioannina, Epirus (region) etc already contain the Albanian names, we can't just add them everywhere cause of your claims.--Zakronian (talk) 00:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

In Berat and Vlore the greek names are in the lead. In Durres page there is a name section, and thats why there is no name in the lead, neither the Albanian one. In Thesprotia region and in norther part of Preveza prefecture, there were at least 1/3 muslim chams, and we do not know what was the number of orthodox albanians. Please see the study of a greek historian, Γ. Κτιστάκης. He states that there were about 20.000 muslimm chams, in a region that had a population of 70.000. and that there is no official number of orthodox albanians, exept the italian occupation cnesus. "Το 1923 στην Τσαμουριά ζούσαν 20.319 μουσουλμάνοι που είχαν τα αλβανικά ως μητρική γλώσσα19. Το 1925 η αλβανική κυβέρνηση έδωσε τον αριθμό των 25.000 μουσουλμάνων20. Από την απογραφή του 1928 προέκυψε ότι στην Ήπειρο ζούσαν 17.008 μουσουλμάνοι αλβανικής γλώσσας21. Το 1938 αναφέρθηκαν από την Γενική Διοίκηση Ηπείρου 17.311 αλβανομουσουλμάνοι στην περιοχή22. Η επεξεργασία των αποτελεσμάτων του 1940 δεν ολοκληρώθηκε ποτέ αλλά σύμφωνα με μία πηγή οι μουσουλμάνοι της περιοχής ανέρχονταν σε 16.66123. Σύμφωνα με μία άλλη -πιο αξιόπιστη- πηγή, οι μουσουλμάνοι ανέρχονταν σε 21.000 έως 22.00024. Τέλος, οι ιταλοί υπολόγισαν το 1941, κατά τρόπο όμως υπερβολικό, ότι στην περιοχή κατοικούσαν 26.000 χριστιανοί Αλβανοί Τσάμηδες, 28.000 μουσουλμάνοι Αλβανοί Τσάμηδες έναντι μόνο 20.000 Ελλήνων25". Even if there were only 25%, which is the lowest number, there surely was a large minority.balkanian (talk) 11:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I didn't make my self clear, in those articles even if the Greek names weren't in the lead they are mentioned in the history section cause they are a known part of those places' history. Even if someone removes them a passing-by editor might re-add them while reading the history section. Now the articles in question are very limited in general, anyway, in your quoting there is no mentioning of Igoumenitsa, Parga, Parapotamos etc, no specific mentioning of these places, how do we know where they were concetrated ??? From what publication is the Ktistakis figures ? --Zakronian (talk) 19:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

We are talking about a certain region. Thesprotia and Preveza, which consist Chameria. The auther explains that they lived in the all region, and most of all he is anti-cham. You can find the hole work here. they were minority in some towns, and majority in some others, but the fact is that they were, they existed and according to WP:NCGN their name should be in the lead.balkanian (talk) 19:34, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

You still don't get the point about wikipedia's name policies, "can be used" or "permitted" is different from "should be used". This is determined by editors. You said it, Thesprotia and Preveza are (large scale) regions, modern prefectures of Greece, Igoumenitsa, Parga, Paramithia etc are cities and towns. There is no conclusion from the sources that their presence was notable in these historical centers. Most of the Cham historiography thing is pushed by Cham organizations the past 15 years or so. Not much to work with, much to be suspicious of. The last website you presented uses the names of these towns to denote the whole geographical zones that Cameria consisted of. There is also a mention of an undetermined number of civic estates, if there were 10 houses in Igoumenitsa that belonged to Chams for example, is this enough reason to add an Albanian name in the city's article ? What we know is that there was a Cham minority spread in Epirus and especially in western Epirus, we also know they mostly occupied themselfs with agriculture, the articles that represent these areas are Epirus, Thesprotia, Preveza Prefecture etc. For more specific places you have to provide more specific sources and numbers.--Zakronian (talk) 23:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

[blog.aacl.com/document-of-the-committee-of-cham-albanians this] is the document of Cham Anti-fascist Committee, conducted in 1946, when they were expelled. You can read there were they were majority, or big minority.217.24.247.227 (talk) 12:27, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Please also read this: "Στην διάρκεια του Β' Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου η περιοχή υπέφερε από τα στρατεύματα κατοχής τα οποία κατέστρεψαν εντελώς την Ηγουμενίτσα και συνεργάζονταν με ντόπιους Αλβανοτσάμηδες. Η εκδίωξη τους μετά την απελευθέρωση έφερε ανακατατάξεις και νέους πληθυσμούς από τα ορεινά της Θεσπρωτίας και άλλα μέρη της Ελλάδας, οι οποίοι πύκνωσαν τον πληθυσμό της Ηγουμενίτσας." It is from Igoumenitsa`s official page, igoumenitsa.gr. It says that when chams were expelled there was a riconfiguring of population.balkanian (talk) 12:53, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

"Parapotamos was inhabited by Muslim Turk-Albanians until 1944 who were driven off by the rebels (who it is known that they had joined the conquerors)." the official site of the municipality, www.parapotamos.grbalkanian (talk) 12:59, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Official site of sagiada, sagiada.gr:"Από το 1950 με πυρήνα λίγα σπίτια που φτιάχτηκαν από το κράτος , δημιουργήθηκε το καινούριο χωριό κοντά στη θάλασσα και τον κάμπο που από τα χέρια των Αλβανοτσάμηδων πέρασε σ’ αυτούς και άλλους πρόσφυγες από την Ήπειρο. "balkanian (talk) 13:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

e-sivota.gr:"Το 1850 κατοικούνταν από 40 τουρκοτσιάμικες οικογένειες. Παράγει λάδι, βελανίδια και ψάρια. Ονομαζόταν Μούρτος από το όνομα κάποιου προκρίτου ο οποίος φορολογούσε και λαφυραγωγούσε τα διερχόμενα εμπορικά πλοία επί τουρκοκρατίας. Σήμερα κατοικείται από Έλληνες που ροβόλησαν από τα ορεινά χωριά της Ηπείρου."balkanian (talk) 13:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

You see the problem here i guess, only Albanian or Greek sources so far. Nothing neutral and reliable. I will only bother with the latter, one by one:

in igoumenitsa.gr only Graikohori village is specifically mentioned to have a decreased population due to the leave of Chams. In the demographics archive it is clearly stated that Igoumenitsa's population increased while the whole of Thesprotia saw a decrease by 31%, all these from 1913 till 1951. Note that the decrease is not and cannot be attributed only to Chams, many leftists left for bigger cities to avoid persecution and discrimination after the civil war.

in sagiada.gr before the paragraph you copy-pasted here it says : "Το 1943 οι Γερμανοί μαζί με τους Αλβανοτσάμηδες του γειτονικού μουσουλμανικού χωριού Λιόψη, έκαψαν το χωριό και οι κάτοικοί του σκορπίστηκαν στα χωριά προς τα βόρεια ενώ όταν τέλειωσε ο πόλεμος οδηγήθηκαν από το στρατό στην Κέρκυρα για την περίοδο του εμφύλιου. Γύρισαν λίγο πριν τη λήξη τους αλλά δεν τους επέτρεψαν να κατοικήσουν στο παλιό χωριό αλλά σε καλύβες στην παραλία."

From the two paragraphs we understand that the old village was destroyed by the Germans in collaboration with the Chams that inhabited the nearby village of Liopsi. The new village was created near the sea and a part of the land used was fields owned by Chams. So no Cham village existed in the new location, only plains, and we know that because of their religion they had the biggest and best pieces of land from the Ottoman period although they were an overall minority, a part of their land was confiscated before WW2 but anyway, i just mentioned it as a hint.

in parapotamos.gr : we can conclude that the village was inhabited by Chams, and they probably were a majority.

There is no article for Sivota, the site states that in 1850 it was a small Cham village. Should we link Sivota with some other place ?

To my understanding only Parapotamos should have an Albanian name in the lead, funny, it's the only name that's completely different, all the other are clear transliterations or are closely connected with the Greek ones. I refrain from any further changes to the names for now, if you find any serious book about the issue please mention it here. I don't think the name additions you propose will stand for long. --Zakronian (talk) 01:24, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

On syvota, see e-syvota.gr and see the history section. On the other hand, on Igoumenitsa, there is a reference too. It says that there were albanians in Igoumenitsa (who collaborated with nazi). About Sagiada, the village was rebuilt nearby, but it is not a new village, it is a rebuilt village. On Parapotamos, we can conculde that the village was entirely albanian, by the way. This are official greek sources, but I agree with you that they are not reliable. But, they would not increase the number of chams, they would decrease it, so they may be referenced in here. I don`t know if I made my point clear?balkanian (talk) 12:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

lol, i was wrong both for Parapotamos and Syvota, the articles are for the modern municipalities, not the villages from which they took their names, have you heard of the recent "Kapodistrias plan" ? where e.g. 10 villages are "united" in one municipality for practical reasons. Syvota municipality has another village as its administrative center, Plataria. Now for Igoumenitsa, no, the only positive conclusion about notable Cham presence is in Graikohori village which is not part of the town. From your quoting there is nothing to conclude, it speaks about the area not the town, which btw was an insignificant group of settlements untill the end of the first half of the 20th century, besides this there are NO figures connected with the phrase you claim as proof. As for Sagiada yes it is a rebuilt village, neither the new village nor the old one is linked with important Cham presence, the only thing it says is that there was a nearby Cham village named Liopsi, from which the Germans got help, and that some Cham owned land was used after Chams had left, not Cham houses, just fields. So you're free from me to make new articles about Graikohori, Parapotamos, Syvota and Liopsi villages and add any Albanian names you have. If you still can't accept the fact, then ask help from an administrator. I believe i am fair with the intepretations, ofcourse the ideal thing would be to have sources that don't need any intepretation, hard to understand when you have passed the OR limit. --Zakronian (talk) 13:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

About Parapotamos, the official site of the municipality states that, so if you do not want to add the albanian name in wiki, ask the municipality to get rid of the sentence (joke). More references: In the town of Igoumenitsa, Albanian language is still spoken, by a minority of population. by miranda vickers and james pettifer. [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arditbido (talk • contribs) 15:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

About Filiates: The muslim albanian town of Filiates. Badlands - Borderlands: A History of Northern Epirus/Southern Albania - Page 120, Tom Winnifirth, ISBN 0715632019, 9780715632017 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arditbido (talk • contribs) 15:30, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

"The market towns of Filiates and Paramythia were mainly Albanian in speech", and this is by your loved NGL Hammond, in his book "Epirus: The Geography, the Ancient Remains, the History and Topography of Epirus and Adjacent Areas", page 27balkanian (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Hammond is a worthy source, i will be able to verify it. For the rest about Parapotamos i can't explain better than i already have. What's the new arguement about Igoumenitsa ? That a sizeable minority lives there now ? or that a mentioning of a modern Albanian speaking group is proof of a notable Cham presence in the past ? You can't derive any of the two. --Zakronian (talk) 04:05, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, so we agreed about Filiates and Paramythia, sourced with Hammond, don`t we? About Parapotamos, I got your point, but the official site of the municipality in its history section, says about the chams. This site, contains history about the municipality, not just the village, or town. So, cham albanians are mentioned in municipality level, and the name is relevant. About Igoumenitsa, we have tow reasons to add the name. FIrstly, that there was an albanian minority (the chams), for whom we do not have a source about the number. and secondly, there is still an albanian-speaking (maybe having a greek seld identification), so the name should be added as local variant of the town.217.24.247.227 (talk) 15:07, 31 August 2008 (UTC) The above one is me.balkanian (talk) 16:36, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes i believe we can use it as source, it would be helpfull if you quoted whatever text you think is relevant in the page the phrase above is mentioned, as i said i will be able to check it myself in the near future, be sure you mention the right page number in the reference. For Parapotamos it would not be accurate to add an Albanian name to a modern municipality that wasn't created from a single village, if you knew about the "Kapodistrias plan" you could understand better, my village in Ioannina for example belongs to a new municipality which took its name from an ancient city, the area it existed is more than 15 kilometers from my village, more or less the same distance seperates it from other villages of the same municipality. You can enrich the article and add it while mentioning Parapotamos village. Lastly, in Igoumenitsa i know for certain that if it really exists the Albanian speaking group is limited, probably some elderly people from the area's villages, you can't in any way connect this mentioning with a current or past notability without speculation. You can always request a third opinion on these matters. --Zakronian (talk) 01:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I know about "Kapodistria plan", but this is not my point. My point is that if a official website of a municipality states that "Parapotamos was inhabited by cham albanians", then "Parapotamos" would refer to the municipality, not only to the village, because it is the historical section of the municipalities website. about Igoumenitsa, the source states that there is still albanian speaking minority. We cannot assume that this is small or big minority, but we can assume that there is a minority. If there is a minority according to WP:NCGN, we should mention the name.balkanian (talk) 10:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry but i can't follow you anymore, how can it talk about a municipality when there wasn't any municipality, it is tiring to argue about every tiny margin you find to make speculations. Same goes for Igoumenitsa. You'll have to ask for help from an administrator who is interested or something, if you insist. I have nothing else to add for these sources.--Zakronian (talk) 11:28, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

About Igoumenitsa see also this, this and a lot of others.balkanian (talk) 11:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

The book's topic is not closely related to the matter but i think Rodogno is a reliable source, the statement is clear and i might be able to check his primary sources also. No problem with adding the reference from me. As for the other link, well, what should i say about it ? --Zakronian (talk) 19:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Having read the discussion, I am still not convinced that the Albanian name should be included per WP:NCGN. I have yet to see a source that says that the Cham presence in the city of Igoumenitsa is notable. While there were Cham villages in the area, Igoumenitsa to my knowledge has always been a Greek city. For those villages where Chams used to be a majority, we can include the Albanian name. Otherwise, if the Cham presence was minor, as is the case here, it should be removed. --Athenean (talk) 16:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

We have tow references. The first states that there was a large albanian minority in Igoumenitsa, and the second that the albanian language is still used in the town. For every one of this reasons the name should be included as per WP:NCGNbalkanian (talk) 16:54, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

These two [2], [3]? You must be joking. The first is a book that is completely off-topic, and the second is a total joke. You will need better sources than that to prove there are indigenous Albanian speakers in town. Sources need to be reliable, and verifiable. A cursory search of "albanians igoumenitsa" on google books is not a reliable sourcing. --Athenean (talk) 17:00, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Nope, its not them. It is this, which is a study about albanians in Greece, by James Pettifer and Miranda Vickers, and the first you mentioned, which is not out of topic, but a historical book.balkanian (talk) 17:04, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Per my reasoning at Talk:Preveza, I would like to think this issue has been settled once and for all. Moved it to the history section, since it has some relevance, but too few sources use for it to be placed in the lead. I really hope this is the end of it. Athenean (talk) 05:09, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

It's not the same so your reasoning isn't appliable to it. You should stop focusing on the name of a minority and do something to improve the article rather than causing disruption over the name.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 09:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Unlike you, I have improved the article in the past. Seems like the one who is obsessing and being disruptive is you. I suggest you find a better way of spending your time. Athenean (talk) 06:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

POV pushing

There is an attempt for POV pushing by User:Factuarius, with sources like ELSME, which for sure is not a RS. He delets secondary RS, replacing them with ELSME, in order to make the article in compliance with Greek nationalistic POV.Balkanian`s word (talk) 15:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

In my edits I deleted not one source I left every source I found, I just added four new. Then Balk. delete them all, together with the added txt and replaced them with his txt in both four articles. One of the sources was indeed from ELSME which is not "a kind of a magazine" as he is thinking but the Hellenic Institute of Strategic Studies (HEL.I.S.S.) [4], a very prestigious body of studies with serious members. One of them is the ex-Deputy Chief of the Anti-Terrorist Service, Lt. General P. Laggaris who has write a report on the problem of Chams, with dates numbers and the like. Then he told me that "ELME is not considered a reliable source in wiki and cannot be added in any page" and delete it again with all the other references and all the txt, sending me a message starting with the words "Take it easy man." That is the story and everybody can confirm it from the postings. --Factuarius (talk) 16:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

ELSME is an NGO, and the article has no single source. Thats why it is unreliable. There are plenty of sources that you deleted, like Mark Mazower, Georgia Kresti, etc etc, living an article from a NGO, without any source in it. And thats because, it just concludes on your point of view.Balkanian`s word (talk) 16:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I deleted no sources I added four new. You deleted all four mentioning always only the ELSME's source (believing that was from a magazine). What about the other three you deleted? You put the sources you mention AFTER you deleted the four mine. This is not a way to examine an issue. Deleting everything you don't like and then sending ironic messages goes to nowhere. --Factuarius (talk) 16:47, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Which four? ELSME is an NGO and publishes a magazine, called PROVLIMATISMI, from which you took that reference. You do not even know where your source was written, what can I say?Balkanian`s word (talk) 16:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The other source is Eleytheria Manta, which is in Cham Albanians and Miranda Vickers, which is accused by your fellow editors as an albanian nationalist lol. So, a summary of Cham Albanians in here, is just the best we can do, if we want to avoid POV. But, you dont.Balkanian`s word (talk) 16:53, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Gentlemen, please calm down and stop reverting each other. As Fut. Perf. says, this will get you nowhere except the exit from WP. May I propose this as a basis for a neutral wording?

"Until the Second World War, the town and the wider area had a mixed population of Greeks and Cham Albanians. During the Axis Occupation of Greece (1941-1944), some local Chams actively collaborated with the occupation forces, forming the Këshilla organization and participating in anti-partisan sweeps and reprisals. Others however joined the Greek Resistance, fighting in the ranks of the leftist Greek People's Liberation Army (ELAS), while the majority remained uninvolved. Nevertheless, in 1944, as the Germans withdrew from Greece, the right-wing EDES guerrillas accused the entire Muslim Cham population of collaborationism, and consequently expelled them to Albania as a collective punishment."

What do you think? Constantine ✍ 17:08, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Agree, by adding that "and consequently expelled them to Albania as a collective punishment, killing about 2 thousand Chams in the process."Balkanian`s word (talk) 17:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, amended to "...as a collective punishment. Over 2,000 Chams died during this exodus." Let's see what Factuarius thinks. Constantine ✍ 17:17, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I am ok with that.Balkanian`s word (talk) 17:18, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Guys, there is a much simpler solution to all this. This article is about Igoumenitsa, not the Cham Albanians. We do not need to turn the articles on igoumenitsa, margarity, parga, etc.. into content forks of Cham Albanians. If something, like a massacre of Greeks or Chams occured specifically in Igoumenitsa, then it can be entered here. Otherwise, if a passage concerns the Chams in general, it really belongs in Cham Albanians. In this article, we discuss Igoumenitsa. Thus it is sufficient to mention that a Cham minority lived in Igoumenitsa and was expelled by EDES at the end of WW II. Particularly tendentious, however, is what the Albanian editors are doing by cutting and pasting the same text in Igoumenitsa, Paramythia, Margariti. This is ridiculous and must stop. These articles are about specific towns, so we only include something that specifically occured in those towns. --Athenean (talk) 17:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Just a notice on "...is what the Albanian editors are doing by cutting and pasting...", that was a Greek editor doing that, and I just simplified it. So, copy pasting withoutn national charachter.Balkanian`s word (talk) 17:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

As for the notable people, the solution is even simpler. Per WP:NOTABLE, verifiable English-language sources must be used to establish notability (this is the English wikipedia, yes?). The Vlora source is simply not going to cut it. I'm sure these signatories to the decl. of independence are ultra-notable hero-figures to our Albanian editors, but this is not the Albanian wikipedia. To the remaining 6.6 billion people on the planet, this means nothing unless sources are used. --Athenean (talk) 17:38, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the article is primarily about the city, but a) this topic has now come up, and it must be dealt with and b) since it is relevant to the history of these sites, we can't simply solve it by deleting this. Personally, I would have no problem with retaining a trimmed-down version stating that they lived there and were expelled (with the proper links for anyone wishing to learn details), but the reason is important, as the present dispute illustrates. As for notability, personally, anyone can add anything who has done something notable enough to keep his/her article from being deleted for lack of notability. There are lists on countless Greek location articles with local painters, MPs, etc who don't even have an article. I know that the OTHERSTUFF policy applies, but still. Constantine ✍ 17:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

There were murders, disappeareansies rapes kidnappings burned villages and lootings here. There where 2,109 official convictions for all that. I am not ready to forget everything I know for being just good boy. These are official documented facts. Saying nothing about is madness. The Greeks lived with them for decades without killing them, rape them or looting them, they started to kill, rape and looting. Is what you proposed all the story? Anyway I do insist for the Thesprotia towns to include these official numbers and the phrase "after the liberation they (the 2,109 officially convicted) succeeded to evade prosecution for collaboration and atrocities by fleeing the country" who can denied it?. For Paramithia also nobody can denied that "Due to the persecutions the Greek state honored the city including it in the list of the four martyr and heroic cities of Greece (together with Kalavryta, Distomo and Kommeno)" that's a fact go to the ministry and ask, go to the official towns site and see who deny it? Why to hide something that nobody can deny? --Factuarius (talk) 17:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The present excerpt is a proposal, it does not make any claim to being the TRUTH(TM)... And yes, all these things happened, but not on one side, unfortunately. The collaborationists' activities are covered under "reprisals". IMO, the numbers ought to go, as they are already more fully documented in the relevant articles. As for Paramythia, we can certainly add this, if there is a source. Constantine ✍ 17:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Factuarius you are one inch from breaking the 3RE rule, so let us discuss the matter and if you can provide us with english reliable sources then all changes will be accepted--Sarandioti (talk) 17:52, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

BTW, Sarandioti, one important note: the problem with Factuarius' sources is not that they are Greek, as you imply, but that they are not necessarily RS and verifiable. Bear that in mind, please. Constantine ✍ 17:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

So are we then going to cut and paste the same text in Igoumenitsa, Parga, Margariti, etc..? We are then turning these articles into content forks of each other and of Cham Albanians.--Athenean (talk) 17:56, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Let's first agree on a common version which affects all articles, and then we can see about phrasing. Either way, content duplication appears to be inevitable. BTW, as far as ELESME is concerned, it is certainly a usable source as it is a credible organisation which represents the Greek POV. For numbers of victims etc however, more sources would be required. I am still awaiting more concrete proposals from Factuarius. Constantine ✍ 18:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

In that case, we should try to include as much town-specific information as possible. I just don't want the same text cut and pasted across multiple articles. As for notable people, I stand by my comment. Too bad for those articles on other Greek locales, they need cleanup as well. --Athenean (talk) 18:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Constantine what I am saying is that giving only the "2,000" Chams and not the numbers of the greek victims we are saying only the half of the truth is this OK? Sarandioti to discusse it with who? I thought it was a difference between us.--Factuarius (talk) 18:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

ELSME can be used only when we are talking about the Greek POV, Constantine. Should we use in here, Chameria Organization articles too? ELSME is a NGO and thus if it is the same as using articles from Chameria Organization. As for the numbers of the Greek victims, find RS and use them, nobody will stop you.Balkanian`s word (talk) 18:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

As for the notable people, can you please tell me where does WP:NOTABLE say that it should be an english source?Balkanian`s word (talk) 18:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

To Factuarius: I can't say I disagree. I pretty much expected that you would object on that account, that is why I initially left the numbers out. Now we have two choices: include numbers (which means that you'll have to get a couple of other sources backing up concrete figures) or leaving them out. My position is that the numbers are not really the point here, as Athenean noted. BTW, My note to Sarandioti was merely a reply to his stressing the "Greek"-ness of your sources as somehow disqualifying.

To Balkanian: ELSME is a think tank, and its members are chiefly retired officers or officials, so that their view could be seen as representative of the Greek government's, i.e. the "semi-official Greek view", which I think you'll agree it is. There is a difference between that and an advocacy organisation. Either way, I am not proposing it as a paragon of objectiveness ;) For the people, nowhere, which is just my point to Sarandioti. Anyway, what about these numbers? Do you really hold the 2,000 death toll that important in this context (i.e. city articles)? Constantine ✍ 18:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The issues about Factuarius's sources are 2: a) they are from a greek organization, whose history shows clearly that it certainly is NOT NPOV, therefore it is NOT reliable by wikipedia standards b)this is merely a translation from a greek source.Factuarius, please find an ENGLISH source, and then we can discuss this. You said this is a "matter between us". This is not an albanian-greek issue, this is an ENCYCLOPEDIA which we all try to maintain NPOV. Bear that in mind. --Sarandioti (talk) 18:26, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, I think that we do not need a "semi-official point of view". We have (1) rs authors, who writte on historiographical context (2) Albanian, Greek and Chams official point of view, when nessecery, and so a semi-official point of view is unnessecary, as it is not a reliable source and does not declare any official position. About the death toll, I will agree with Athenean that this need just two or three sentences of a general overview, and then a city-by-city history.Balkanian`s word (talk) 18:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

It is a sufficient requirement that sources be in the English language, not written by native speakers. A translated foreign-language source is thus acceptable (unless it's a google translation). If these people were truly notable, there would exist some English language book that would mention them (even Vickers, let's say). So the fact that not a single English-language publication mentions them really tells us something. --Athenean (talk) 18:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Constantine I will get more sources about the greek victims. And I will also insist in mention also their active participation in the Holocaust against the Jewish of the area (also official documented):

"Muslim Cham units also played an active part in the Holocaust in Greece, including the round-up and expulsion to Auschwitz and Birkenau of the 2,000-strong Romaniote Greek-Jewish community of Ioannina in April 1944." [Mazower, Mark. "Inside Hitler's Greece: The Experience of Occupation, 1941-44". Yale University Press, 1993, ISBN 0300089236.] --Factuarius (talk) 18:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thats not true, Constantine has the book and has informed us that there is nothing about Chams in it.Balkanian`s word (talk) 18:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Constantine?--Factuarius (talk) 18:37, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately I believe it is true and that also cannot be hidden. But I will await for Constantine's confirmation before put it in the article. --Factuarius (talk) 19:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The citation above was indeed once used, IIRC in the Chams article. I have Mazower's book however (in English), and I cannot find any mention of it in any form, or indeed any mention of the Chams. I have specifically re-read the sections concerning the deportation of the Epirote Jews, but there is nothing of the sort to be found. According to Mazower, the deportation was supervised by the German Geheime Feldpolizei. That's all. PS. about ELSME, I never said that it was a neutral source, merely that it was usable to document the Greek POV (that is to say, it is not a random website that one found on Google, but its views have some substance and relation to what people actually believe in Greece). Regards to all, Constantine ✍ 22:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I think a single sentence along the lines of "Town X was home to a Cham Albanian community that was expelled to Albania following WWII as some of its members collaborated with the Axis occupation forces" would be sufficiently informative and neutral to satisfy everyone. The longer we make this, the more potential for conflict. --Athenean (talk) 05:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the trimmed version, unless it's something more specific concerning the town. The articles are relatively small anyway.Alexikoua (talk) 06:38, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I certainly agree with shortening it to something the size of what Athenean proposes, but the wording needs some tweaking still: the connection with the simple causal conjunction "... as ... " implies that for a minority population to be summarily expelled is somehow a natural and appropriate consequence of whatever it was that preceeded – which, of course, it is not. Passing over it like that can still be seen as a form of implicit claim of political justification, hence whitewashing. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:14, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

How is "Town X was home to a Cham Albanian community until the end of World War II, when they were expelled to Albania as a collective punishment for the collaboration of some Chams with the Axis occupation forces."? Constantine ✍ 10:29, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

As I said, the "collective punishment" is just *one* of the reasons of their expulsion. See: Mazower, there are four reasons of their expulsion. So why shouldnt we word it this way: "Town X was home to a Cham Albanian community until the end of World War II, when they were expelled to Albania" and if there is any other info for the town or the villages nearby we may add it.Balkanian`s word (talk) 12:22, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Acceptable by me. Although I would prefer the reason be spelled out just in case, the links suffice to clarify the matter for anyone interested. What do the others think? Constantine ✍ 16:02, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Just a note: Mazower puts for reasons for their expulsion:

• Because Chams fought with EAM-ELAS (IV "Ali Demi" battalion), although EDES had asked them to inscript in its ranks.
• To create a pure ethnic Greek border.
• To create the facilities for British in the region, which were against EAM-ELAS and Chams were fighting in its ranks.
• To get revenge for the collaboration of some of the Chams.

So, if we want to put the reasons in one sentence, it should be the four of them, not just one of them. Thanks, Balkanian`s word (talk) 16:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, by "reason" I meant "pretext" or "justification", not "motive". ;) Constantine ✍ 17:00, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, then. But, I still think, we should avoid, this part. :)Balkanian`s word (talk) 17:04, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I like Constantine's version best. If you're going to say they were expelled, then you have to mention the reason they were expelled and by whom. Otherwise, just say, "Prior to WW2 the town was home to a Cham Albanian minority", and leave out the expulsions. Btw, reasons #1 and #3 are essentially the same so a slightly modified version of Constantine's version would also do:

"Town X was home to a Cham Albanian community until the end of World War II, when they were expelled to Albania by the EDES resistance as a collective punishment for the collaboration of some Chams with the Axis occupation forces and the rival communist EAM-ELAS resitance group." That should cover it. --Athenean (talk) 18:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

References

Population figures

About their active part in the Holocaust in Epirus, I made an inquire to the Central Board of Jewish Communities in Greece. I hope to have an official position about that soon to clear the matter. About the Greeks the expression “some of them” is totally misleading. From a community of 15 or even 18,000 people 2,109 of them convicted for atrocities during the occupation by name from the official legal system of the state. 2,109 out of a population of 18,000 is not some, is nearly everybody could take arms (the most efficient conscription rate of the era was 8:1 both in France, Germany and USSR). What EDES or EAM could have with them is one issue, you can say whatever you want. What the official State had with them is an other issue. If it's too much to mention both issues we cannot omit the official one. It is so clear that most of them took their families and took the way to Albania just to avoid persecution for what they had done during the occupation. So, the expression “some” must go or the numbers of the convicted against that of the population must mentioned in order not to mislead the reader, and the “fleeing the country to avoid legal persecution” must added. I cannot imagine how we can override their legal-problem reasons in fleeing. Am I wrong? --Factuarius (talk) 01:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I think the actual numbers of the population were closer to 50,000, so there is a major difference. And if 2,000 collaborated while ca. 1,000 joined the Resistance, that still leaves the vast majority unaccounted for (BTW, given who did the sentencing post-war, I'd wager that many amongst the 2,000 convicted were former ELAS fighters, and not necessarily collaborators). As for the expulsion, Balkanian has provided a number of relatively neutral sources saying that it was anything but voluntary, and I am inclined to believe that. Historically, individuals or families may leave "to escape justice", but when entire populations leave, they are almost always forcefully expelled... Constantine ✍ 08:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

According to the official greek census of 1940 there were 16,600, according the prewar League of Nations estimations 20,000. No, they were convicted for collaboration and atrocities (conviction nr. 344/23-4-1945 του Ειδικού Δικαστηρίου δοσιλόγων Ιωαννίνων, and the subsequent named convictions after). Also according to a US-officer report many left the country with german transportation means during their retreat from Greece. The ELAS-fighters' number is grossly overestimated, many of them, before going to ELAS, actually took active part in the atrocities. The figures 2,109 and 1,000 are not about two diferent groups of people as you believe. They went to ELAS after 1943 only to escape the legal consequences after the nearing end of the war and ELAS took them, as you know, because of its local conflict with EDES and the urgent need in eliminating EDES in Epirus (it was a similar story with the members of the SNOF). Make no mistake, they preferred to go to ELAS and not to EDES because everybody in Greece knew after the Psaros incident that EDES had not a single chance to survive in Epirus after the liberation (as indeed happened) and not because of their democratic, progressive and national liberating feelings. Their opportunistic policies just lead them to ride on the false horse for a second time, this time to avoid persecution for what they did riding the Axis horse. Thats the real story about, all the others are just to hide it. If you have a sound reason in preferring to hide it let me know and maybe I can agree with you. --Factuarius (talk) 10:21, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, well, the Greek censuses apparently didn't count Orthodox Chams into the Cham population, so that distorts the picture. What you say may be good and true, but please provide sources. I'm not trying to "hide" anything here, because I also do not feel particularly strongly about either version of events. I will readily admit limited knowledge, but I think I am therefore also more representative of the average reader, i.e. each side can present its arguments, and I can decide based on that. Anyway, this discussion ought to be transferred to the CHam Albanians talk page. What about Athenean's last proposal? Is it OK with you? Constantine ✍ 12:13, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

About the 50,000 figure you gave: Mark Mazower states that they were about 18,000 in 1944 and 4 to 5 thousands in 1945. Which is a second indication that most of them left the country together with the german army and under their protection, not after, as some trying to impose today for obvious reasons. (After The War Was Over: Reconstructing the Family, Nation and State in Greece, 1943-1960. Princeton University Press, 2000, ISBN 0691058423, pp. 25-26.) Victor Roudometof puts the number at 20 to 30 thousands, (Collective Memory, National Identity, and Ethnic Conflict. ISBN 0275976483. p. 179) and Miranda Vickers says that they were 25,000 (The Cham Issue - Albanian National & Property Claims in Greece. Paper prepared for the British MoD, Defence Academy, 2002.ISBN 1-903584-76-0). Even the Chameria Association claims that Cham Albanians were 35,000 which is ridiculous high and by definition POV. So I believe you must be wrong. --Factuarius --Factuarius (talk) 13:10, 6 June 2009 (UTC)(talk) 12:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

My position to Athenean's proposal is in my 01:09 post --Factuarius (talk) 13:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Mazower gives "20,000 or so Muslim Albanians", excluding the Orthodox population, and the same applies for the other estimates. Unless the Orthodox did not collaborate at all, this must be taken into account (for a total of ca. 30 thousand). Mazower also clearly states that their flight was the result of EDES' attack on the Cham villages, and that the 4-5 thousand were those who actually returned in early 1945 only to be expelled again. Not quite the same with what you are claiming... And I have also seen no indication in the sources that the Chams as a whole supported ELAS, thus "backing a losing side", only that they did not support EDES (quite naturally, since by that time it was a thoroughly right-wing organization)... Please provide some sources that clearly substantiate the claim that the Chams were leaving under German protection, that the collaborators went over to ELAS, etc... Constantine ✍ 13:35, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, I believe the official greek census of 16,600 or the (not friendly on that) League of Nations 20,000 figure and if I have to accept another figure I will stay in the ridiculous “Chameria Association” figure of 35,000. I will never accept your 50,000 figure you insisting Constantine. But I am alone on that. I am sure that very soon you will find at least two fellow participants to agree with you, so I am a minority for sure on the issue. Do -both of you- whatever you want with the article, put 50,000, write nothing about their collaboration with the nazis, note nothing about their convictions, saying nothing about their atrocities and explain in detail how those beasts the greeks suddenly took knifes to butcher them. I am out. Congratulations, you sold the problem now everybody can learn what really happened. Bye --Factuarius (talk) 14:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I never said that the Chams as a whole supported ELAS I was speaking for those they went to ELAS

"Αντίθετα από τον ΕΔΕΣ, το EAM τήρησε μια περίεργη στάση σε σχέση με τους Τσάμηδες. Επιχείρησε επανειλημμένα ανοίγματα που βασίζονταν στον μάλλον πλασματικό διαχωρισμό «μιας δράκας προδοτών» από την πλειοψηφία του πληθυσμού -πλασματικό στον βαθμό που ο παραδοσιακός αυτός πληθυσμός ακολουθούσε τους ηγέτες του και έδειχνε μια προτίμηση προς την κατοχική διοίκηση ακόμη και όταν δεν συμμετείχε άμεσα σε πράξεις βίας. Για αυτόν τον λόγο η τακτική του EAM δεν έγινε κατανοητή ούτε από τον τοπικό ελληνικό πληθυσμό ούτε από τα ίδια του τοπικά στελέχη που ανέφεραν στις εσωτερικές τους εκθέσεις τις οποίες παραθέτει η Μαντά ότι «η παμψηφία σχεδόν των αρβανιτάδων Τσάμηδων της περιοχής είχε ταχθή ανεπιφύλαχτα με το μέρος του κατακτητή και ωργάνωνε δολοφονικές επιδρομές ενάντια στα ελληνικά χωριά». Ο ΕΛΑΣ τελικά στρατολόγησε γύρω στους 300 ως 500 Τσάμηδες που συμμετείχαν στις εμφύλιες συγκρούσεις με τον ΕΔΕΣ τον Δεκέμβριο του '44. H επικράτηση του ΕΛΑΣ συνοδεύτηκε από την επιστροφή 3.000 ως 5.000 Τσάμηδων στη Θεσπρωτία. H τελική όμως έκβαση των Δεκεμβριανών οδήγησε σε νέες διώξεις από τους οπλαρχηγούς του ΕΔΕΣ και στην τελική εκδίωξή τους." ΣΤΑΘΗΣ ΚΑΛΥΒΑΣ καθηγητής Πολιτικής Επιστήμης στο Πανεπιστήμιο Yale, το ΒΗΜΑ Κυριακή 4 Δεκεμβρίου 2005 (Ένας ακόμα φασίστας εθνικιστής στο Βήμα) --Factuarius (talk) 14:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

And about leaving under German protection if you don't have the oppinion of Balkans about being a magazine read the article [[5]]--Factuarius (talk) 15:01, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, please bring books written by historians (if possible neither Albanians, nor Greeks), which clearly state what you belive, and we are ok. If you do not have such sources, than leave it this way.Balkanian`s word (talk) 16:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The above is from a "book written by historian you fellow participant: E.K.Manta "Muslim Albanians in Greece. The Chams of Epirus (1923 - 2000)" according documents from (the very friedly then) ELLAS. So, are you OK? The nr. of the convictions are OK? The numbers of the Chams in the wikipedia's their expulsion article as it is documented is it OK? All we need more is a standard calculator and enough honesty to say the truth here and there. Is this OK?--Factuarius (talk) 17:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

This is turning out exactly as I feared, into a discussion on the Chams and their collaboration and expulsion instead of a discussion on how to improve the article on Igoumenitsa. Personally, I would be content with just saying "Prior to WW2, Igoumenitsa was home a minority community of Cham Albanians." A reader wondering what happened to them could then click on the internal link and find out more than he would ever want. Otherwise, we risk just getting bogged down into victimological-type arguments about expulsion, collaboration, numbers...You can all already see where this is going. As far as the town of Igoumenitsa is concerned, suffice to say that Chams lived there before WW2 and leave it at that. --Athenean (talk) 16:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Agree, what about "Igoumenitsa was home a minority community of Cham Albanians, until their expulsion at the end of WWII". In order to put a link on Expulsion of Cham Albanians page, which explains the whole matter?Balkanian`s word (talk) 17:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The only problem with that is if you mention the expulsion, then you have to mention the reasons, and that's when it starts getting complicated. That's why my proposal is minimalistic. An internal link to Cham Albanians should be enough, I think. Their expulsion and the reasons for it are mentioned in detail in the lead of that article. --Athenean (talk) 17:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, calm down Factuarius. The 50,000 figure was off the top of my head, so mea culpa. I don't advocate it and it is not the issue here anyway. Nor am I saying anything about not "hiding" the collaboration etc. nor am I pushing for a specific version of history. But we are trying to reach an agreement about a simple phrasing issue, which has spiralled out of proportion, and up until now you did not provide any sources to back some of your claims, and misquoted those you did provide. That does not help your position. BTW, for your information, I would have held the same stance had Balkanian or any other done the same. But anyhow, let's end this interminable discussion, shall we? I agree with Athenean, let's just add this bloody sentence and be done. Regards to all, Constantine ✍ 17:34, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The number is exactly the issue I wonder how can I put it to understanding it. If almost all able men of almost every family had took the (german) arms and starting burning and killing hand-to-hand with the germans who could be so idiot to stay after the germans left the country. Thus they had also to flee. "most of them to avoid legal persecution for atrocities committed in collaboration with the Nazi occupational forces" Balkanian`s understand it very well I understand it very well how you cannot? The numbers are the key of the issue of understanding what really happened, you and the reader.--Factuarius (talk) 18:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, Athenean, I think we have it. What about "Until the Second Warld War, Igoumenitsa was home to a community of Cham Albanians." Adding a link of Expulsion of Cham Albanians in "until the second world war"?

Factuarius, try to read: They did not "flee", they were "expelled by force". Try to read sources. Read Mazower.Balkanian`s word (talk) 18:19, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree they expelled by the force of the post-war consequencies for the atrocities committed in collaboration with the Nazi occupational forces. How you believe they believed that could escape legal persecutions for that? So to stay? Give me an answer about that and I will agree that the greeks expelled them. No problem --Factuarius (talk) 18:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Have you ever heard of ethnic cleansing?Balkanian`s word (talk) 19:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Is this your answer on what I am asking you? --Factuarius (talk) 19:46, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

My answer is, we do not care about each-other opinions, but about sources. Familiarize with wiki policies. And by the way, if you have any problem with Chams history, go to Talk:Cham Albanians, not here.Balkanian`s word (talk) 19:48, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Citations and Links

I gave you the necessary sources for the story at 17:44 what else do you want, to give you? The articles are not copy-pastings from books especially the books you like. They have also logic and indeed I will go to the Cham Albanians article I have already inform you about that. Now are you going to answer my question so to close the issue here?--Factuarius (talk) 19:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

No, wikipedia, is about citing books, not about truth. Please familiarize your self with WP:RS, WP:SYNTH, WP:OR, WP:What Wikipedia is not.Balkanian`s word (talk) 20:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

What truth did I mention truth? I mention logic. Do you disagree? Stop terrorizing me with links. I only mention logic. Now can you answer me what directly I am asking you in order to agree with you in everything and to give us an end to this long discussion? --Factuarius (talk) 20:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I would prefer a link to Cham Albanians rather than to Expulsion of Cham Albanians, as I feel the first article, being a GA, is more reliable than the expulsion article, which is somewhat inbalanced. The expulsion and the reasons behind it are discussed in the lead of Cham Albanians anyway. The remaining issues can be discussed in Talk:Cham Albanians --Athenean (talk) 20:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I do not think there is any problem with Expulsions article, as it is refd with the same authors.Balkanian`s word (talk) 20:21, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Athenean do you really believe that the discussion is about the article's link? What he is trying is to put the expression Expulsion in the phrase even as a link. Whose idea was it of Taulant23, Sarandioti or yours Balkanian`s word? --Factuarius (talk) 20:31, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The problem with linking to the Expulsion article is that it is an underhanded way of saying they were expelled without explicitly saying so. Linking to the Cham article is more neutral and uncontroversial. I will also remind everyone that the expulsion article only has about 50 edits or so, almost all by Balkanian (with most of the remainder being copyedits). --Athenean (talk) 01:33, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

The phrace:

"Igoumenitsa was home of a minority community of Cham Albanians, until 1944 when they forced to leave the country to avoid legal persecution for large scalled atrocities committed in collaboration with the Nazi occupational forces during Axis occupation of Greece"

The word "forced" added to content Balkans. I am not agree in omit colaboration. And I don't agree to say nothing about the reason of their elimination from the community. If it was just "ethnic cleaning" why greeks didn't do it before 1944? --Factuarius (talk) 10:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)--

Or I have no problem in agree to go to the Balkanian`s phrase "Until the Second World War, Igoumenitsa was home to a community of Cham Albanians." with the link he wished for the Expulsion of Cham Albanians, when Balkanian`s will answer my question in how according his opinion they could believe to escape legal persecutions for their collaboration and atrocities committed If they stayed. The numbers indicating that almost every family had men involved in collaboration and atrocities. Just give me that. We cannot totaly ban common sence from the article because we just don't like it ----Factuarius (talk) 10:51, 7 June 2009 (UTC)\

OK, as you wish my response here is it. A minority of Chams collaborated, why would they all leave Greece? Did Greeks leave Greece, because some of them collaborated? Secondly, the ones who collaborated - which was a minority - why would have to leave Greece? Their sons may have became prime ministers of Greece!Balkanian`s word (talk) 13:59, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

This is not an answer is the denial of the question. First, as we have discuss it a day now the collaborators were not “a minority” where almost all combat-able males of its community, if you don't believe it I told you to confirm it with a calculator. Second, I agree that the best was to stay and pay for their crimes, problem is they disagreed with us, so this is not an answer. Third, your argument that their sons may have became prime ministers is “η μπάλα στην εξέδρα”. Εven the prime minister Konstantinos Logothetopoulos convicted for life's prison just for his collaboration without having made any atrocities as was their case, be more informed about. Rallis was more of a persona of English (even Germans knew it) as was the case with Damaskinos than of the Germans, read more about it. Now, do you have any better ideas in answering or we will continue to play around.--Factuarius (talk) 15:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

If you continiue with Wikipedia:IDONTHEARTHAT, I will not answer to your questions any more. The collaborators were a minority, per Mazoparticularewer, Vickers, Kresti, Manda, and all the sources we have. If you do not like it, than go somewhere else to discuss about it. Please bring sources that they were not a minority, and stop assumpitioning.Balkanian`s word (talk) 15:48, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Why have you answer any? You are always playing with the words. I am not completely idiot to play me in such a way. Off course the collaborators where a minority against their community, every army is a minority against its people, babies women and grandmothers cannot fight, collaborate or make atrocities, the combat-able men do such things, But these particular men where not idiots to stay and prosecuted, when the easy solution was a day long. I am not the person to answer why after what they had done against the unarmed civilians during the occupation they preferred to take their families with them. Ask them. By the way do you really have Manda's book? have you really read it? Do you find it reliable? Because I am going to use it extensively in some articles, so I am happy in seen you to use her.--Factuarius (talk) 16:33, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Since you asked for sources and mention Manda as such:

«η παμψηφία σχεδόν των αρβανιτάδων Τσάμηδων της περιοχής είχε ταχθή ανεπιφύλαχτα με το μέρος του κατακτητή και ωργάνωνε δολοφονικές επιδρομές ενάντια στα ελληνικά χωριά» Manda--Factuarius (talk) 16:45, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Did you forget something? ...τοπικά στελέχη που ανέφεραν στις εσωτερικές τους εκθέσεις τις οποίες παραθέτει η Μαντά oti "blablabla oti aneferes". For english users, the above sentence is in Mandas book as "internal documents of topical Greek fighters", aka EDES. It is not Manda saying that.Balkanian`s word (talk) 12:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Did YOU forget something?

With lies upon lies nobody can expect to go far. Except you. No, as the other half of the Manda's phrase you don't want to mention, indicates, this report is not from EDES but from the friedly EAM. For the english users you are trying to mislead so shameless, this is her complete phrace:

"For this reason the EAM's tactic was not understood by the local Greek population, NOR FROM ITS OWN OFFICIALS, WHO REPORTED IN THEIR INTERNAL REPORTS that «almost unanimously Albanian Tsami of the area, prescribed unpreservedly with the part of the conqueror and organized murderous raids against the Greek villages.». This is what Manda said and since you mentioned her for a second time you can wait for more.

"Για αυτόν τον λόγο η τακτική του EAM δεν έγινε κατανοητή ούτε από τον τοπικό ελληνικό πληθυσμό ούτε από τα ίδια του τοπικά στελέχη που ανέφεραν στις εσωτερικές τους εκθέσεις τις οποίες παραθέτει η Μαντά ότι «η παμψηφία σχεδόν των αρβανιτάδων Τσάμηδων της περιοχής είχε ταχθή ανεπιφύλαχτα με το μέρος του κατακτητή και ωργάνωνε δολοφονικές επιδρομές ενάντια στα ελληνικά χωριά»".

--Factuarius (talk) 07:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Greek source = POV source. Let's move on. If u want to continue this, there's always the sandbox --Sarandioti (talk) 07:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC) Sorry user blocked as sockpuppet.Alexikoua (talk) 05:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Your policies are shameless, first you mention Manda about "minority", then you lying about what she said, then you dismised her declaring her POV. I wander: don't you have any shame inside you? There are people waching you, you don't feel uncomfortable about them?--Factuarius (talk) 07:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Factuarius, your citation from Manda is a valid one, but I feel this matter would be best discussed in Cham Albanians, not here. I think the issue here has been resolved. And don't let Sarandioti provoke you into overracting. His post is an example of what we call trolling and is solely designed to get an angry reaction out of you. Just ignore him when he says things like that. --Athenean (talk) 23:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Interesting facts, it can be added on Chami article. I believe Manda said something about the Cham burning of Igoumenitsa, can u check out? This could fit in here.Alexikoua (talk) 05:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Again it is null! EAM local officials reported that bla bla bla. The question is does Manda endorse that the majority collaborated? NO! OVER!Balkanian`s word (talk) 12:51, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you ask? So you don't have the book? How you used it before? Not only endorse that almost unanimously (not just the majority) Chams collaborated, but she is proving it by providing the confidential reports of the EAM officers protesting to their HQ for its opportunistic Cham-friendly policy, which could have not been understood by the local Greek population, nor from them. Since «almost unanimously Albanian Tsami of the area, prescribed unpreservedly with the part of the conqueror and organized murderous raids against the Greek villages.» Buy the book.--Factuarius (talk) 13:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

LOL. first of all the phrase in brackets is just inline of the report of EAM. Manda does not endorse that position! Also, please take a look on Talk:Cham Albanians consensus: no Greek, no Albanian source, on World War II issues.Balkanian`s word (talk) 14:11, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

You had to think about the "consensus" before used her. And also this is Igoumenitsa's talk. I will start a new discussion about the sources matter in the Cham Albanians talk section, hoping to find support for a limited use of local sources. Will see. --Factuarius (talk) 16:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

She is not used in WWII section, but as I said: the phrase in brackets is just inline of the report of EAM, not her position.Balkanian`s word (talk) 16:15, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Why not discuss these facts, the article has gaps on the WWii section. I can't understand why Manda sould not mentioned as supporting material. Also Vickers states it clear:[[6]]
Want to know more?

1. Miranda Vickers, “The Cham Issue - Albanian National & Property Claims in Greece”, Conflict Studies Research Centre, Eastern Europe Series, G109, April 2002. (we know)
2. Eleftheria Manda, The Muslim Chams of Epirus. (we don't know)

Manda is also used as an rs by Vickers and the article has already Greek and Albanian sources as supporting material.Alexikoua (talk) 16:34, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I have no problem in discussing them, unless you have no problem to include in the article material from Arben Puto, Maksim Kollozi, and other albanian historians. THis was why we avoided both povs, and relayed only in Mazower, Kretsi, and some other non-ALbanian, non-Greek guys, on that section. But, as I said, the problem is not if we use her or not, *which I still think that we should avoid, for the above reasoning* the problem is that the phrase in brackets is just inline of the report of EAM, not her position.Balkanian`s word (talk) 16:39, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

It's her position based among others to the confidential reports of the EAM officers READ THE BOOK! --Factuarius (talk) 17:30, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I told you, even if it is (which is not), if you use it on WWII issue, I will use Puto, Kollozi, et al. We had a consensus not to use Greek and Albanian authors, exactely because they present a strong POV, even when we talk on numbers, being unreliable.Balkanian`s word (talk) 16:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back. What strong POV? You have a consensus? With who and in what article? In every article in wikipedia? To this one? I don't thing so, I find no such consensus agreement all over the discussion page. See by yourself. I also found that in the Cham's discussion page you also mention a consensus about authors in some 20 times but a more detailed reading of all postings shown that this is more of a invention of yours and nobody agreed about it in the first place. Which is also the reason that this article has 23 greek sources, including some of yours or other fellow albanian users. What you are doing is to repeat the same story here as there. The problem is that unlike there, this discussion page is relatively small and everyone can easily find out that there was no such consensus agreement except in your imagination. For everyone who has the time I also suggest to go to the Chams discussion page to find out how by repeating that supposed "consensus" over the sources, everybody at last accepted that as a fact, without anyone having agreed about in first place. --Factuarius (talk) 16:48, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

There is a consensus proposed by me, that every one accepted, on not using Albanian and Greek authors on the WWII issues of Chams. If you do not like it, I am willing to accept your idea, and to start puting on that page:Manta, Puto, Kollozi, et. al. Its quite simple. The article has 23 greek sources, not on the WWII issues, except of Manta that you put in! In every case I do not care; propose something NPOV and reliable, and then go on. Not using your imagination and putting on Mark Mazowers mouth that all Chams collaborated.Balkanian`s word (talk) 17:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

No, what your link shows is one user (Alexikoua) only partly agreed. Explain "all". Also this is Igoumenitsa's article and still you are to explain where is the consensus you are mentioning here. You are also wrong when you say that every greek source in Chams article is not about WW2. Read them again. Also you are wrong saying that I put a note from Manta about WW2. It is about the prewar situation. Also you are misleading by saying me to propose something NPOV since I put both Owen Pearson and Bernd J. Fischer which are not greek authors and you also deleted my paragraph. I suggesting to stop lying and stop deleting and saying "goto the discussion". We are discussing here 15 days and you have dismised everything being totaly absent a week now. --Factuarius (talk) 17:32, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Which who burned the chams or Greeks igoumenitsa (Gumenica)

I removed the propaganda which I never heard about Chams burning their own city, The city was burned by zerva's troops in 1944 who came to terrorize the population there which were Ethnic albanian chams and ethnically cleans the city but whole part of Southern Epir (Chameria) please if anyone wants to make propaganda against poor innocent people that got nothing to do with nazi germans go in some other sites not in Wiki which is supposed to be a serious site not a HATE site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.99.251.53 (talk) 17:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I've reverted the recent deletion of sourced material. Please take a look at wp:whatiswikipedia.Alexikoua (talk) 19:03, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150921212047/http://dlib.statistics.gr/Book/GRESYE_02_0101_00098%20.pdf to http://dlib.statistics.gr/Book/GRESYE_02_0101_00098%20.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720164428/http://www.main-board.eu/guncel-sorunlar-ve-hayat/9383-1911-12-trablusgarp-savasinda-deniz-kuvvetleri.html to http://www.main-board.eu/guncel-sorunlar-ve-hayat/9383-1911-12-trablusgarp-savasinda-deniz-kuvvetleri.html

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:50, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Native born person

It's weird to claim that a person was born in this settlement while the correspondent article does not cite this fact.Alexikoua (talk) 20:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Conflicting claims on language, wouldn't verify

The following edit claimed it to be Arvanitika dialect [7] and then the other edit changed it to a nameless dialect,[8] while in the edit summary the editor claimed that it is Cham dialect. The quote from the source and the page number are missing and wouldn't be verified. So we don't know if it is Arvanitika, or Cham? The edit was reinstated without consensus and without providing the necessary information required for verification.

I want WP:GOODFAITH believe that Alltan's ignoring of the "No consensus for this edit" [9] was merely a mistake of the moment and not a sign suggesting a persistent behavior of ignoring the importance of seeking consensus for disputed edits. The unverified edit will be removed again as there is no consensus for inclusion unless the editor provides the necessary quote and page number for verification. If the edit is reinstated without seeking WP:CONSENSUS by providing the quote and page number necessary for WP:VERIFICATION. then this will be considered disruptive case of brute-forcing at the expense of WP:ONUS and I will inform admin Cullen.

Edit: Added {{which}} tag as well [10]. - ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 23:39, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

As far as I have read, there has never been an Arvanite community in Igoumenitsa, or in Tsamouria for that matter. Arvanites are the Arvanitika-speaking communities south of Thessaly and Epirus. To say their dialect is spoken here implies a migration of them from Attica, Boeotia etc. No such migration has ever been talked about. It is much more likely the author is describing the remnant Cham dialect, which for socio-political reasons has come to be also called Arvanitika, mostly by Greek-speakers. The same thing has happened in Plikati, Flampouro, the Albanian communities in Thrace etc. I do not think Wikipedia needs to follow these "misnomers" for lack of a better term, as we already know through research which groups are Arvanitika speaking and which are Tosk/Lab/Cham-speaking. In the same way, there are countless sources which describe "Albanian villages of Attica/Argolida/Andros" etc. But these are simply referring to Arvanite communities. I would like to read the source further however, which is why I added the template. Preferably there should also be a quote to see the deeper context of the authors argument. If @AlexBachmann can be so nice to provide these it would be very helpful.

By the way, I appreciate you assuming a little bit of good faith. We all know how to contact admins, but its' really not about that. We can go through one TP discussion without administrative involvement. With you if I may say I hope to have somewhat reasonable discussions on such matters. Alltan (talk) 00:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't mind the alternate names on lede, and I am sure that you don't mind me asking for quote and page number before I consent to that. There is no need for actual discussion once these two bits of information are provided. The edit may then be restored without any further need for discussions. The only reason I would want to discuss it is in the case I spot any discrepancy between what the source does state, and the edit. Good day. - ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 00:27, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

I understand that. But what I am saying is that there are cases where authors will use Arvanite/Albanian interchangeably, and we have to be aware of the deeper historical context of an area in question so as to not provide inaccurate information to the reader, say through using incorrect linguistic terminology. Alltan (talk) 00:37, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

If the author states it is Arvanitika, then the article will reflect on it, because Arvanitika is indeed spoken in Igoumenitsa, whose municipality, the Municipality of Igoumenitsa, includes historical Arvanite settlements such as Kastri which is only 3km away from Igoumenitsa. - ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 07:19, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

There are no Arvanites in Epirus. They are just Orthodox Albanian Chams/Labs/Tosks who say they are Arvanite so people don't call them Alvanos, but they have no specific cultural links to the Arvanites of southern Greece. Alltan (talk) 19:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Sorry but if the people self-identify as Arvanites and the source confirms that, then the least Wikipedia can do is to respect it. The same is true for Orthodox Chams as well. Also I wouldn't be surprised if sources state both. That there are Arvanites isn't mutually exclusive with Orthodox Chams anyway. Good day. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 19:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Their national self-identification is irrelevant though. They are in the emic sense Arvanites, but in the etic sense Chams (unless there is a source which says Arvanites migrated here). Regardless, we can't say they are Arvanitika speakers because they simply aren't. They (most likely, will have to see the full quoute) speak Cham or maybe if we consider it a separate dialect, Souliotic. Alltan (talk) 20:21, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Here's the quote "In a town such as Igoumenitsa (Albanian Goumenitsa), the Albanian language is still spoken by a minority of inhabitants." p.238 AlexBachmann (talk) 21:14, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry for writing "Arvanites", I took it from the article Chameria. AlexBachmann (talk) 21:15, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

@AlexBachmann, feel free to add the alternate name to the lede, and make sure to add both the page and quote to the source in the main body, so that future editors can verify it. @Alltan, I prefer we stick to what the provided sources say. Nothing less, nothing more. Good day. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 21:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

I think the author is refering to the Cham-Dialect. Because a few sentences before the quote, the author states "There was an internal division in the Cham world between coast-dwellers, who tended to be rich Muslim beys who prospered on the food and olive export trade to Corfu, and the mountain people who were more often Christian and always poorer." AlexBachmann (talk) 21:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Also I found another source: "Aside from the Arvanitika settlements themselves, there are speakers of southern Albanian dialects, in particular Çamërian, in [...] Igoumenitsa, and Filiates [...]. " Historical Dictionary of Albania, Robert Elsie, 2010, 9780810873803 AlexBachmann (talk) 21:34, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Actually the source says "around Igoumenitsa", not in Igoumenitsa itself. Khirurg (talk) 21:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

@Khirurg It does not. There are two sources. it just says "Igoumenitsa", not around or something similar. AlexBachmann (talk) 21:44, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Can I have the full sentences quoted from both sources about Igoumenitsa please? Without any [...] in them. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 21:45, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Source 1: "In a town such as Igoumenitsa (Albanian Goumenitsa), the Albanian language is still spoken by a minority of inhabitants."

Source 2: "Aside from the Arvanitika settlements themselves, there are speakers of southern Albanian dialects, in particular Çamërian, in many settlements along the border region, from Florina (Alb. Follorina) and Kastoria (Alb. Kosturi) in the east, to Parga (Alb. Parga), Igoumenitsa (Alb. Gumenica), and Filiates (Alb. Filati) in the west on the Ionian Sea." AlexBachmann (talk) 21:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Elsie's is viewable online [11]. On p. 264 it says: To the south in Greece, there are traditional settlements of Camerian dialect speakers, in particular around Igoumenitsa and Parga in Epirus.. Since he speaks of multiple settlements, he is doubtless referring to Margariti, Agia, Ammoudia, etc. But he doesn't say in Parga or Igoumenitsa itself. Khirurg (talk) 21:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Btw, SilentResident, Alex even added the Albanian name in the lede of Kastoria [12], which is clearly undue. Khirurg (talk) 21:56, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

@Khirurg, Kastoria has nothing to do with Igoumenitsa now. AlexBachmann (talk) 21:57, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

He's refering to "traditional settlements of Chamerian dialect speakers". On p. 173, it says: "Aside from the Arvanitika settlements themselves, there are speakers of southern Albanian dialects, in particular Çamërian, in many settlements along the border region, from Florina (Alb. Follorina) and Kastoria (Alb. Kosturi) in the east, to Parga (Alb. Parga), Igoumenitsa (Alb. Gumenica), and Filiates (Alb. Filati) in the west on the Ionian Sea" AlexBachmann (talk) 21:57, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

@AlexBachmann: which source (i e. the book title, author and page) does say "In a town such as Igoumenitsa (Albanian Goumenitsa), the Albanian language is still spoken by a minority of inhabitants"? Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:00, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Pettifer, James (2007). The Albanian question : reshaping the Balkans. Miranda Vickers. London: I.B. Tauris. p. 238. ISBN 978-1-4416-4114-4.AlexBachmann (talk) 22:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

That source is reliable, focused on Albanian populations, and can be used to back the statement that there some in Igoumenitsa itself speak Albanian. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:04, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

It's also 15+ years old, and given that the language is not taught anywhere and its use no encouraged, it may no longer be true. Khirurg (talk) 22:08, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Find a source that states that Albanian is completely extinct in Igoumenitsa. AlexBachmann (talk) 22:10, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Not a problem at all, it can be written as "James Pettifer and Miranda Vickers (2007) noted the presence of an Albanian-speaking minority in Igoumenitsa". Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:13, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Considering that RS confirms the use of Albanian by a small minority, then I don't see a problem mentioning it. Igoumenitsa lacks a dedicated Names section, so names may be added on lede unless such a section is created on the main body. What do editors here want? Alex, by the way, do not start adding names on all articles like how you did at Kastoria. If articles have 3 or more alternate names, they ought to go to the Names section instead. The Manual of Style - Alternative Names states that If there are three or more alternative names, or if there is something notable about the names themselves, they may be moved to and discussed in a separate section with a title such as "Names" or "Etymology".. Good day. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 22:17, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

I know this has nothing to do with Igoumenitsa, but on Parga, Khirurg is also against the mention of the Albanian name. AlexBachmann (talk) 22:19, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

SilentResident There is actually a dedicated name section, and the Albanian name is already mentioned in there (in addition to the old name of Γραβα, the Ottoman name Resadiye, and the Italian name Gomenizza). So that's at least 4 alternate names. Khirurg (talk) 22:23, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Neither Turkish nor Italian is spoken in the city. AlexBachmann (talk) 22:27, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Also, the article is also about the municipality... AlexBachmann (talk) 22:33, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

The are separate articles for the municipal units. The "municipality" trick is not going to work. The Albanian name is not used by 10% or more English language sources, per WP:NCGN. WP:NCGN states: Nevertheless, other names, especially those used significantly often (say, 10% of the time or more) in the available English literature on a place, past or present, should be mentioned in the article, as encyclopedic information. Two or three alternative names can be mentioned in the first line of the article; it is general Wikipedia practice to bold them so they stand out. If there are more names than this, or the lead section is cluttered, a separate paragraph on the names of the place is often a good idea. It's clearly not the case here, and even more so in Parga. But I'm talking to someone who did this. Khirurg (talk) 22:40, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

About Kastoria, I don't think it can be equated to cases of formerly Albanian speaking towns in Thespriotia, so I don't agree on adding the Albanian name there. At least if we only have 1 source. Alltan (talk) 22:35, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Turkish isn't spoken in Igoumenitsa, while Italiot is spoken, and Italy maintains a Consulate there as well. As is Arvanitika. If I am not mistaken, there is an Aromanian community in the city too, especially at the Graikochori district. However I do not have sources confirming whether the Aromanians living there still maintain their language. For now I suggest that the Alternate Albanian name is added on lede along with Italian one, and if editors want to add more names in the future, they are welcome to stick to the solution of the Names section instead per Manual of Style - Alternative Names.--- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 22:35, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Arvanitika is not spoken in Igoumenitsa. There is also no source for Italian being spoken there. Alltan (talk) 22:37, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

There is wp:NCGN, @Alltan: you need to stop behaving like wp:IDHT. Is the Albanian form used significantly often (say, 10% of the time or more) in the available English literature? Alexikoua (talk) 03:10, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Firstly, about what Alltan said, I looked the entire morning for sources confirming Italian and Aromanian languages in Igoumenitsa and I wouldn't find any. This means Alltan is right since the only sources I found was the small Italian heritage the town has, including the Venetian Castle of Igoumenitsa (which is not even mentioned on the article at all). Therefore, considering these findings, and to correct myself on what i have stated above: the Italian and Aromanian names may not be mentioned on the lede, only in the Names section.

Secondly, about what Alexikoua has pointed to, I looked for the prominence of the alternate names in the sources and I found that: Igoumenitsa netted 20,500 results while Gumenicë netted 364 results only which is a really low 1.7% percentage. This means Alexikoua is right as there is an issue with the alternative name not being prominent in the sources. Prominence of alternate names in sources is a factor that I tend to take seriously when I am adding an alternative name to an article in Wikipedia, like how I have done recently at Alexandroupolis's article where I added the alternate names [13] after ensuring they are used by an at least significant number of sources (10% or more) in the English literature. And same is true for the Diapontian Islands where I have initiated a Page Move [14] after ensuring that the term Diapontian is indeed the English one and is used by at least a 10% of the sources.

Considering the above facts, and in line with the guidelines, to correct myself again, I support now having the alternative names for Igoumenitsa be mentioned on Names section instead of the Lead. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 10:55, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

@SilentResident I believe you were misled @Alexikoua's selective citation of the naming convention. The full statement is: "Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or that is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted" (see here:[15]).

Albanian was spoken in this town by a significant portion of the population and today a minority still speaks it there, while the rest are in Albania since WWII. Çerçok (talk) 11:26, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Oh. All right. Copy-pasting the general guideline here for everybody's convenience and to avoid any zig-zags on the matter: "Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or that is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted." In light of this, then the Albanian name should be permitted on lede. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 12:00, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

@Cercok: Take into account that this definition means that Albanians cities such as Korce, Vlore, Berat, where Greek speakers are still found will have the Greek alternative name at first line there. In the case of Igoumenitsa Winnifrith stated there is no Albanian speech there. Alexikoua (talk) 21:22, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Alltan appears to be in a desperate rv-only strategy now. By the way Winnifrith states that there no Albanian speakers found at modern times. Alexikoua (talk) 21:30, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Other sources say otherwise. And one question: How should Winnifrith find out if there aren't any Albanian-speakers left? Is he a RS? Has he gone to every household and asked if they speak Albanian? Do you understand my point? The most here agree that the Albanian name should be in the lede. We all know that there are still Christian Chams. Some sources from the year 2000 amout them to 40.000 (Miranda Vickers)!

You both Alexikoua as Khirurg are visibly against the Albanian names in the lede. WP:POV AlexBachmann (talk) 23:24, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I am not refering to the quote that there should be the name if a group of people used to inhabit the place, but I'm refering to the active Albanian population in whole western Epirus. AlexBachmann (talk) 23:28, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

And there is an active and very prominent population in Gjirokaster, but the Greek name is only in the name section, not the lede. And that is fine, I'm ok with that, but we can't have double standards. The Albanian name is in the Name section, and in my opinion that is sufficient, especially considering how hard it is to find sources regarding the supposed Albanian-speaking population in town. Khirurg (talk) 02:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

First of all, please tag me properly if you want to refer to me. The main point is not the residing population (that would require every Greek town to have Albanian alternative names due to Albanians living there). The main point is that there is a community in Albania who spoke Albanian there until WWII and still uses the name Gumenice, that is why it is relevant. I am not aware of any group of community of Greek speakers from Korce, Berat, etc. who have left and are today using the town's names in Greek. That said, as long as this distinction is considered, I am open to any idea about how to name settlements in both Albania and Greece avoiding double-standards. Çerçok (talk) 08:33, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I am disappointed now to find that there have been inconsistencies ("double standards") in the Naming Convention's application among towns in the two Topic Areas. I recommend that editors who asked for the application of the general guideline here: "Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or that is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted.", to do the same for other cities in the area, such as Gjirokaster. Or else I will believe this to be a WP:BadFaith case of Double Standards. I don't even want to read the past conversations on those article's talk pages and rather propose here a Gordian knot-cutting proposal that everybody involved in this dispute, respects the guideline, and thus, add Albanian names in Greek towns where Albanian populations are still living, and add Greek names in Albanian towns where Greek populations are still living. Who does agree with me in keeping the articles in an area consistent with each other and in line with the Wikipedia's Naming Conventions regarding Alternate Names? --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 08:49, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree that there needs to be uniformity, but I disagree on the still living criterion. Past populations are relevant too. The part that is open to interpretation here is how large should this population be. Çerçok (talk) 10:10, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes of course. I didn't meant the "still living" as mutually exclusive with the "lived". However, since we are dealing with settlements of varying sizes here, the editors will have to agree that a settlement's size is a reasonable factor in determining whether the other language names may be mentioned on the lede. The villages and towns where communities are smaller and their composition is smaller, may not have their ledes be treated the same way as large cities and metropolises where several groups lived, and the societies are multicultural by nature and thus a lede may not be comfortable to reflect them all - for large cities and metropolises, a Names section is almost always the rule.

Because I am aware that this issue is plaguing the topic area for years (correct me on that, but I think I remember disputes similar to this happening again in the past), and one reason it wasn't resolved thus far, I presume is because criteria tend to be another Gordian knot, right? This reduces any prospects for agreeing for the application of the Naming conventions. Considering this, can't we just agree to the Naming Convention's implementation and have alternate names displayed on Lede for villages and towns, and for large cities and metropolises have the Names section instead? --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 11:32, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, we should agree on a more specific naming policy, within the existing convention guideline. My first proposition is that if the settlement is multi-ethnic, then only 2 or 3 names should be listed, the ones of the most widely spoken languages. This is the number suggested by the guidelines in general, so we can apply it here. Second, I think size should be relative to the settlement itself, for example if a language is spoken by over 15% (or any other % we can agree on) of the inhabitants, or 15% of the inhabitants used to speak it but have left and still still exist as a community elsewhere (like the Chams), the name should be stated in the lede. Çerçok (talk) 13:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Percentage criteria are unrealistic I am afraid. Especially for the Greek settlements considering that Greece, much like the rest of the EU, doesn't ask for people's ethnic origins or language in the population censuses. Only nationalities. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 15:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

What do you propose then? Çerçok (talk) 15:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I propose that we stick to the Naming Convention without making things more complicated, and thus give room to POV-pushers to undermine it. With the convention in mind, we only have to check whether a language is recorded in at least 10% of the sources and then use it on lede, or the group has been recorded to have lived there. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 15:33, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

@Çerçok: Ethnic minorities are also found in Greece and are fully recognized. As far I can remember in the census of 1989 the Cham minority counted c. 50 individuals that are found all over the country. On the other hand Albania revokes the minority status if someone is found outside its so-called "minority zones".Alexikoua (talk) 00:11, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

No, they are not. But it is irrelevant to the discussion. Çerçok (talk) 01:36, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Ethnic minorities are also found in Greece and are fully recognized. are you kidding me right now? Also, Albania's minority rights are not comparable to Greece's by any means. Perhaps Turkey's are. Super Ψ Dro 14:11, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Do you actually have anything meaningful to contribute to this discussion, or are you just here for polemics? Comparing Greece's treatment of minorities with that of Turkey, where minorities are actively persecuted, is not only deeply ignorant, but also deliberately provocative and incendiary (even more so since it's not related to this discussion). You comment has crossed the line and you should strike it as a sign of good faith. This is not the place for you to air your grievances against Greece. Khirurg (talk) 04:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

The problem is that these criteria are too loose. There are Albanians living in Athens but if you ask me the Albanian name of the town is not necessary for the lead. Çerçok (talk) 01:40, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree that the "used to inhabit" criterion is not suitable for these cases. It's vague and hard to establish and can lead to all kind of absurdities. Khirurg (talk) 03:51, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

For which cases? The distinction is arbitrary. Çerçok (talk) 10:08, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment: I think User:Super Dromaeosaurus should strike their following WP:BADFAITH comment: "are you kidding me right now? Also, Albania's minority rights are not comparable to Greece's by any means. Perhaps Turkey's are." I am presenting here the Civil Liberties and Religious Freedom Indexes for the year 2021 so that the Wikipedia community can assess them and see how Super Dromaeosaurus's statements about the human rights/religious rights situation in countries is indeed as comparable as the editor claims to be:
  Civil Liberties Index 2021
  The Religious Freedom In The World Report 2021
  Global Freedom Index 2021
  Democracy Index 2021
  Such statements by Super Dromaeosaurus are unproductive and unhelpful. They are welcome to criticize governments and policies if they like, provided that the article's subject is relevant to these policies and there are NPOV issues about covering them, but when the editors speak negatively about countries as whole, it can be seen as rude and unhelpful not only to the discussion, but to the overall climate of civility, trust, understanding and cooperation that was supposed to prevail in the community. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 09:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Alexikoua complained about minority rights in Albania while defending those in Greece (and SD responsed to him), and Khirurg complained about "persecution" in Turkey. Why is only SD's comment that concerns you? Ktrimi991 (talk) 10:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Because correct me if I am wrong, Ktrimi991, but the rest of you have long been involved into disagreements about the situation of minorities in the respective countries, and you have actual participation to the discussions about Greeks in Albania and Albanians in Greece in the various Talk pages. Right? On the other hand, Super Dromaeosaurus who never participated in this Talk Page previously, just popped-in there [16] to make a WP:BADFAITH statement [17] targeting countries without reason, just like that. Nothing else. No actual talk page participation about the disputed content, nothing. His only involvement wasn't to mention on content or help find a solution to the disagreements you are having, only to speak negatively of countries. I don't know how does this does look to you, Ktrimi, but yours, Khirurg's and Alexikoua's actual participation in the talk page discussion here doesn't seem "comparable" (if I may adopt Super Dromaeosaurus's wording), in my eyes, to what Super Dromaeosaurus did here with the comment of theirs. So yes, excuse me, but it is reasonable that I feel uncomfortable with that kind of behavior. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 11:23, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

This whole off-topic discussion started with Alexikoua's inaccurate remark. Let's go back to topic. Çerçok (talk) 11:28, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Indeed. Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:51, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

• I will not further argue about this here and make any comment after this one on this topic as it is true this is not related to the discussion. But I am not sure how do the links given above by SilentResident refute my comment. The context was ethnic minority rights. I will use this chance to remind that Greece still hasn't signed the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, that it only recognizes an ambiguous multiethnic Muslim minority (i. e., the claim that is all minorities in Greece are recognized is outright false) and only due to a century-old treaty, and that figures such as Sotiris Bletsas have been persecuted in Greece for trying to defend minority rights in the country. I will refrain from making such comments provided that other users do not make false statements in a serious discussion. And I struck Turkey's part as a sign of good faith. I stand by the rest I said, which clearly doesn't constitute a negative comment about Greece "as a whole". Super Ψ Dro 13:39, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

@Super Dromaeosaurus: Can you tell me how many state-sponsored Aromanian schools are operating in Albania?Alexikoua (talk) 03:21, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

At least one in Selenicë [18]. Albania only recognized the Aromanian minority in 2017. It is not as advanced as North Macedonia for example on this issue. Note that Aromanians can also use their languages in churches at Moscopole and Korçë. I'd be surprised if Aromanian, or any minority language, was spoken at any church in Greece. Super Ψ Dro 13:57, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

It's not a matter of minorities: modern Greek is also not spoken at any church in Greece.Alexikoua (talk) 04:58, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

User:Super Dromaeosaurus, the churches aren't an accurate measure of the people's language rights because even Modern Greek is banned (literally) in the Churches.[19] The Sign Language isn't used either. The liturgical language of the services in the Churches is the Koine and the adherents are having a hard time understanding it since it isn't mutually intelligible with the Modern.[20] --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 00:45, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

• Even the Arvanites are not recognized, and it is tried to eradicate Arvanitika from the map. (see: Geographical name changes in Greece). No recognized status, no minority language, no schools, also that is almost the same with the Chams. But hey, 35.000 Armenians who live in Greece are recognized! However all of this is off topic. AlexBachmann (talk) 19:31, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Firstly, AlexBachmann, you are reminded that no country has a clean slate about their past. Secondly, I will urge that everybody here, including AlexBachmann, Alexikoua, Super Dromaeosaurus, and Khirurg stop this, because WP:NORACISTS and WP:NOTADVOCACY. That is to cease targeting nations or countries of editors to promote a propagandistic narrative about a group being oppressed. This is an extremely unproductive and unhelpful. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 23:44, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

AlexBachmann: needless to say you need to stay off topic, you also need to follow wp:WHATWIKIPEDIAISNOT.Alexikoua (talk) 00:06, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Since we are talking about Igoumenitsa and racism, a couple of additions are here needed, in particurlar crimes by Cham bands (executions, murders, looting) perpetrated in collaboration with the Axis forces .Alexikoua (talk) 00:09, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

By the way, what makes a report submitted in 1945 to the UN [[21]] wp:RS? Imagine to add plenty of similar reports by various Greek representative on the issues of the Greek minority of Northern Epirus.Alexikoua (talk) 02:15, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Don't you have anything to do but denying the Cham massacre? You know exactly what the EDES did. AlexBachmann (talk) 19:13, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

If you have RS that can support those events you claim and are related to Igoumenitsa go on.Alexikoua (talk) 02:41, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Name section

The name section appears in need of corrections & upgrades since the current text isn't supported by the available inline refenrence.Alexikoua (talk) 02:40, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

By the way the world of Greek origin "γράβα" should not be misspelled with the Albanian "γκράβα". Alexikoua (talk) 04:38, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

About the alternative names I just remind that wp:NCGN it is recommended to have a name section if there are at least three alternate names. Well since there is one I wonder why there should be a selective mention on the first line of the lead.Alexikoua (talk) 23:11, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Again, what about Delvina, Saranda, Gjirokastra? No double standards. AlexBachmann (talk) 12:08, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

All of those cities have large, living Greek minorities in them. Igoumenitsa is different. There are no double standards whatsoever. Khirurg (talk) 15:09, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Igoumenitsa has an Albanian minority. In case you haven't noticed, there was a big discussion above this section about that. Since that it has freezed. AlexBachmann (talk) 20:00, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. Not a single sources says there is an "Albanian minority". The Chams were expelled 80 years ago, and that's that. Time to move on. Khirurg (talk) 00:43, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Pettifer, James (2007). The Albanian question: reshaping the Balkans. Miranda Vickers. London: I.B. Tauris. p. 238, Elsie, Robert (2010). Historical dictionary of Albania. Lanham: Scarecrow Press. p. 173. I think it's time for you to refresh your recollection and see who has actually to move on and who doesn't. AlexBachmann (talk) 21:04, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Where do they state there is an "Albanian minority" in Igoumenitsa? You tried the same thing at Ioannina and it went nowhere, the only thing you managed was to waste everybody's time and yours. Same thing here. Khirurg (talk) 00:09, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

"In a town such as Igoumenitsa (Albanian Goumenitsa), the Albanian language is still spoken by a minority of inhabitants" WP:HUH? AlexBachmann (talk) 12:43, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Not at all. Even those people that still speak Albanian (and there aren't many nowadays, mostly elderly), no longer identify as Albanian, but as Greeks. See this source:[22] Speaking Albanian, for example, is not a predictor with respect to other matters of identity .. There are also long standing Christian Albanian (or Arvanitika speaking) communities both in Epirus and the Florina district of Macedonia with unquestioned identification with the Greek nation. Totally different situation from the Greeks in Albania, who identify as Greeks. Khirurg (talk) 15:55, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

"Not at all"? So you just say the source is false without any reason? How they identify is irrelevant, they speak it and use the name. Just for the record: We've agreed to put the Albanian name on cities/villages with an Albanian population in Epirus. AlexBachmann (talk) 17:55, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Where did I say "source is false without any reason"? The "Not at all" was directed at the accusation of WP:DIS towards me. How they identify is critically important. If they identify as Greek, they are Greek, not Albanian. If I identify as Greek but speak English, does that make me English? And no, I don't recall that we have agreed to put the Albanian name on cities/villages with an Albanian population in Epirus, besides the fact that Igoumenitsa does not have such a population. I would also like to remind you that the Greek name is missing from Gjirokaster, despite the large Greek minority there. Khirurg (talk) 18:03, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

I haven't found about Gjirokastra until now. The WP:HUH? was because you wrote "Where do they state there is an "Albanian minority" in Igoumenitsa?" even though the sources say they speak Albanian. But all right, if Gjirokastra is like that, Imma let this go. AlexBachmann (talk) 18:14, 14 June 2023 (UTC)