Talk:Kastoria (regional unit)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Greece Low‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geography Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

Demographics[edit]

There seems to be confusion here. One would expect that a town in Macedonia (Greece) would have a Greek population, no reason to mention this. Note that Macedonians (Greek) are Greeks and not the same as Macedonians (ethnic group) who are Slavs. It is clear that before 1913 there was a large Slavic population, but this does not necessarily reflect the present situation that has changed due to emigration and assimilation. It is true that numbers are hard to obtain, but it is indispensable that sources are cited regarding the existence and extent of the various ethnic groups. Andreas ^(T) 18:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are sufficient sources to safely assert that before the region was attached to Greece the majority of the population was Slavic and Albanian. --Sulmues ^(talk) 19:52, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Using a source from 1920 for demographics info for 1920 is like using a source from 1500 AD for demographics for 1500 AD, or using a source from 500 BC for 500 BC. In other words, WP:PRIMARY. Besides Kastoria is landlocked, so I don't see how the US Navy would have personnel there. Out is goes. And Sulmues, a warning: I noticed you are gaming WP:3RR a lot lately. In other words, you consistently perform 3 quick reverts in an article, then stop. 3RR is not an entitlement, and consistently making 3 reverts in an article is gaming the system. If this behavior continues, e.g. here, I will file an AE report. Athenean (talk) 20:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right now you have made a revert and I have made a partial revert to your removing of a valid reference. If you have a problem with that reference, bring it to WP:RS. --Sulmues ^(talk) 20:04, 15 October 2010 (UTC) In addition a refresher on primary sources: they are sources very close to an event, often accounts written by people who are directly involved, offering an insider's view of an event, a period of history, a work of art, I don't know how the Naval Intelligence is directly involved. Besides how are demographics better "managed" 100 years from the census? --Sulmues ^(talk) 20:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What census? What are you talking about? The event is 1920, and the source is from 1920. Duh. Athenean (talk) 20:09, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nope the one that should go to wp:rs is the one that is obsessed in using it. Until then and since this is against the basic rules we use this needs to be removed (Sulmues: have you the exact quote of this? it has not one, hope you didn't make the revert for the usual reasons).Alexikoua (talk) 20:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

found the link for you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.13.97.189 (talk) 21:16, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to Vasil Canchov census there were only 5 albanian populated villages in Kastoria region :Sliveni,Revani,Miroslavica,Sak,Vicista with a total population of about 1800 people.So comments like "predominantly albanian" are simply liesParapente (talk) 21:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although I don't feel that this kind of material is the best one we can use: Sulmues needs to explain here why he edit warred about something he didn't even read: [[1]] and used a completely diferrent text in the article: [[2]].Alexikoua (talk) 23:14, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, why do we have demographic info on the city of Kastoria in the Kastoria Prefecture article? Not only does it not belong here, but it's rather misleading because in many cases (as here) the population of a Balkan city is not at all representative for the population of its hinterland. In many areas, Greeks, Turks and Jews were present or even dominant in cities, but practically unrepresented in the surrounding villages, which were Bulgarian, Albanian, Serb or whatever you like.

Also, I wouldn't really like to join any kind of dispute here, but the "Using a source from 1920 for demographics info for 1920 = PRIMARY" argument makes no sense. Demographic statistics for 1920 cannot come for later than 1920, they have to be recorded first, otherwise they would be belated estimates :) WP:PRIMARY has little to do here, as it concerns the interpretation and analysis of sources. I'm not saying statistics cannot be biased, on the contrary, they very often are, so their origin has to be made clear in my opinion. E.g., "According to contemporary British estimates, in 1920 the majority of the inhabitants of Kastoria were Greeks, with additional communities of Jews, Turks and the remaining being Albanians, Aromanians and Bulgarians." It's estimates because the Brits counted houses and because the source says "some 2,000".

Is adding the census data from 2001, published in 2001, also like using a source from 500 BC for 500 BC? — Toдor Boжinov — 12:01, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your opinion. I've stated that this isn't the best source we can use here [[3]], although a number of editors insisted.Alexikoua (talk) 12:08, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The source itself is fine for me, but the sentence about the demographics of the city should be moved to the city article. Also, the sentence currently simply states that the inhabitants "were", which makes the statistic look a bit too authoritative. We certainly have to mention it's just a British estimate. — Toдor Boжinov — 12:20, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent)Btw the British estimate has info about both the city and the area [4], so Alexikoua shouldn't remove that estimate since he has added the estimate about the city itself. --— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 12:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion is if the specific source should stay here (please avoid out of topic miseading hints).Alexikoua (talk) 13:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent)Kastoria is the seat of a Greek bishop, but the Christians of the villages in the plain are mostly Bulgarian and Albanian shepherds. is definitely not off-topic.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 15:06, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but unless a source talks about Kastoria prefecture specifically, it has no business in this article. Athenean (talk) 16:39, 19 October 2010 (UTC) 16:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excactly, no mention about Kastoria prefecture. I also wonder what's the 'plain'? As I know the prefecture consists only of mountainous terrain.Alexikoua (talk) 18:26, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First you say it's not about the prefecture and then you wonder why they mention a plain, assuming they're talking about the prefecture :D — Toдor Boжinov — 11:44, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the editor that initially placed this source wasn't willing to give the exact snippet [[5]] not to mentioned that he in the article added the estimate 'the inhobitants of the city'. On the other hand his answer was quite aggresive [[[[6]] (accussing without looking into the case).

Since we hadn't the excact snippet, but just a wrong addition about the 'city's' demographics, we could only guess, which snippet is the right.Alexikoua (talk) 15:28, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Arta (peripheral unit) - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 23:01, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]