Content deleted Content added
m Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 5 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "C" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 5 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Albania}}, {{WikiProject Greece}}, {{WikiProject Romania}}, {{WikiProject Archaeology}}, {{WikiProject Ghost towns}}. |
|||
| (83 intermediate revisions by 21 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject
{{WikiProject
{{WikiProject
{{WikiProject Romania|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Archaeology|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Ghost towns|importance=low}}
}}
== Albanians in Voskopoja? ==
Line 190 ⟶ 194:
[[http://books.google.com/books?id=2xYzAAAAIAAJ&q=moschopolis%2Bmetropolis&dq=moschopolis%2Bmetropolis&hl=el&ei=JpozTMKiEoGlsQbZpqTOAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CEgQ6AEwBw]]
And of course a 60,000 large city in the 18th century: and [http://www.google.com/search?hl=el&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=%22a+population+of+60000+and+was+the+second+largest%2C+most+important+city+on+the+Balkan+Peninsula+after+Constantinople%22&cts=1278450663351&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= second largest] city in the Balkans that time "was" a metropolis.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 21:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
:The 60k is the true Metropolitan Legend. The city had 25-30k inhabitants [http://www.google.com/search?hl=el&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=voskopoje+banore&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= See Gjurmime Albanologjike] (which says that Athens and Belgrade at that time had 20k, so it's Ok I guess. --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
::Even with 20,000, it was a huge urban center of that time. Only a few Balkan cities were that large, since we are talking about 17th century pre Industrial revolution era. By the way since we have plenty of English speaking sources, non-english sources (and especially stalinist ones) as per policy are not preferred.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 20:50, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Line 199 ⟶ 203:
Moreover, the term Metropolis, is also related to the Aromanian diaspora, which originated from Moscopole (the term has the same meaning of the ancient Greek metropolis here).[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 21:11, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
:What's the meaning of the ancient Greek metropolis Alexi? --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
::Presumably this refers to Moscopole as the "mother city" of the Aromanian diaspora, on the analogy of ancient Greek colonies. But as far as I know, Moscopole did not send out colonies. And anyway, using the word 'metropolis' to describe Moscopole as a center of emigration makes the article less, not more, clear. Perhaps some clearer formulation can be found? --[[User:Macrakis|Macrakis]] ([[User talk:Macrakis|talk]]) 16:57, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Referenced Elsie's review of Peyfuss: It's ''said'' to have contained 20-50k.--<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
@Makrakis, there are dozens of books that name Moschopolis Aromanian metropolis [[http://www.google.com/search?q=moschopolis%2Bmetropolis&btnG=%CE%91%CE%BD%CE%B1%CE%B6%CE%AE%CF%84%CE%B7%CF%83%CE%B7+%CE%92%CE%B9%CE%B2%CE%BB%CE%AF%CF%89%CE%BD&tbs=bks%3A1&tbo=1&hl=el]]. Can you please check at least one before you continue with this discussion? Saying that all this meanstream bibliography is useless isn't something reasonable.
Line 213 ⟶ 217:
Actually Peyfuss adopts the 70,000 claim. Also he says that Albanian historians claim that the population was 20,000 or lower [[http://books.google.com/books?ei=ry42TPv_MYWXsQbEqZzPAQ&ct=result&hl=el&id=2MxpAAAAMAAJ&dq=moschopolis%2BPeyfuss&q=60.000%2Beinwohner#search_anchor]].[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 20:04, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
:Can't see the full context of Peyfuss though. Elsie we can see in full. --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
::It's a well known book, actually all estimates are from 50,000 to 70,000. Albanian authors tend to minimized the number (per Peyfuss).[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 21:01, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Line 223 ⟶ 227:
And Winnifrith, a specialist on the Aromanians adopts the 60,000 claim[[http://books.google.com/books?id=7zVpAAAAMAAJ&q=moschopolis%2B60,000&dq=moschopolis%2B60,000&hl=el&ei=rlE2TIHbBtKksQbllv20AQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDwQ6AEwBTgK]]. However, none can be sure about the city's exact population number that time.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 22:33, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moscopole&diff=next&oldid=372463418 this edit] seems to be of another opinion. The statistics on the bottom are clearly clashing with what the main text is saying currently. No one can be sure but we have to think about how many people were served by 24 churches. The number in my opinion is between 10k and 20k. --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
::I suggest we create a section about these estimates. No official data existed that time, although 18th cent. writers and travelers (like Thunmann) adopted the 60,000 number. I've also found some exaggerated estimates of 200,000 [[http://books.google.com/books?hl=el&id=VFkUREqRFswC&q=moschopolis#v=onepage&q=200%2C000&f=false]]. I believe all this stuff should fit in a section.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 20:32, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
:::That's fine with me. --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
Re the word "metropolis" -- in looking over the various sources cited in Talk and in the article, it becomes pretty clear that most of the uses of the term "metropolis" are in the sense of "mother country" or "homeland" (from the perspective of an emigrant or colonist), not in the sense of "very large city". This is especially clear in the Gilles de Rapper article, which is written by a French-speaking person and includes many uses of French terms. Other uses in the cited sources are referring to metropolis in the sense of the chief town of the Aromanians or of the region. In any case, I have tried to be more precise in the use of words -- 'metropolis' is too ambiguous, I think. --[[User:Macrakis|Macrakis]] ([[User talk:Macrakis|talk]]) 21:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Line 233 ⟶ 237:
== Pics ==
Can someone do pics mgmt here? I don't want to stir up any controversy. --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
bravo sulmues the change of voskopoja to moscopole in historical context is laudable..[[Special:Contributions/87.202.53.82|87.202.53.82]] ([[User talk:87.202.53.82|talk]]) 16:55, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
:Although I might have been of a different opinion in the past, and the consensus might change in future, for now in my opinion we should keep Moscopole throughout the article. It's the name in Aromanian and the city gained its notability in the 18th century, when it was mainly a Vlach city. In addition per respect of what the Vlachs have given to Albania (and Greece for that matter), we should conserve the Aromanian name. --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
::Nationalistic future plans for wikipedia... That's very interesting, please read [[wp:what wikipedia is]].[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 22:02, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
:::I'm not saying that I will change opinion. I'm saying that consensus of other editors might substitute my opinion. --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
::::That's what you exactly did on talk:Panajot Pano, when a troll appeared and you supported him. This doesn't mean that this is constructive: following trolls and support the 'hidden' pov.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 23:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
:::::Alexi, get the facts straight and take the blinkers off your eyes. No one told me to take off all Voskopoje and substitute it with Moscopole. Panajot Pano has nothing to do with Moscopole. --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
::::::[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moscopole&action=historysubmit&diff=374584442&oldid=374562003 Great edit by Athenean]. --<span style="font-family: Gothic;">[[User:Sulmues|'''<big>S<big><sub></sub></big></big>'''ulmues]] <sup>([[User talk:Sulmues|talk]])</sup></span> 12:49, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Line 254 ⟶ 258:
Is the book by Ben Blushi [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moscopole&action=historysubmit&diff=372456871&oldid=372455109] "literature"? Seems more like a non-notable, pop culture anti-Muslim polemic. I also note that the novel itself is used as a ref, which is rather comical. Since I already know what the usual suspects are going to say, I'd be more interested in the opinion of neutral editors. [[User:Athenean|Athenean]] ([[User talk:Athenean|talk]]) 21:04, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
:Although you might not need my opinion, I doubt that many people have read the book. I have. It's a fictional book about characters of Voskopoje. The plot of the book spans for two centuries and evolves around the city. The artistic value in my opinion is not one of the highest: Ben Blushi, although son of a very notable children's writer, Kico Blushi, doesn't seem to be at the heights of his father in literature, and seems more versed in politics (he is number two of the [[Socialist Party of Albania]] (after [[Edi Rama]])). That's just my opinion, though. Still the book's main character is the city of Voskopoje/Moscopole and the description of the city's belle epoque and its decline. It describes how the first people of Moscopole started to become Muslim and how internal wars between Muslims and Christians led to the destruction of the city. The controversy that the book generated was clearly notable both nationally and internationally. --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
Moscopole has been the main topic for hundreds of books/media through the last 200 years. The current section is the definition of pov since it mentions just one work, and should go as per wp:advertisment.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 10:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
:Why should it go Alexi? Give me other examples of literature on Moscopole and, if possible, enter them in that paragraph. It's not that we have hundreds of fictional books on the town and we should get rid of the bad ones. IMO it is notable and verifiable and should stay. --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
::Actually this is the definition of pov:'' All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, '''all''' significant views that have been published by reliable sources.'' This isn't all but the tiniest fraction you could find.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 13:17, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
:::I removed. If it's such a big deal, let's keep the poorest state of art. --<sub><span style="border:1.5px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sulmues#top|<
== What about a gallery section? ==
[http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&ns0=1&ns6=1&ns12=1&ns14=1&ns100=1&redirs=0&search=voskopoja&limit=500&offset=0].--<span style="font-family: Gothic;">[[User:Sulmues|'''<big>S<big><sub></sub></big></big>'''ulmues]] <sup>([[User talk:Sulmues|talk]])</sup></span> 18:01, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
:Well, galleries are a bit depreciated. Be sure to read [[Wikipedia:Galleries#Image_galleries|this]] before making an attempt at one. Best. --'''[[User:Laveol|<
::Someone brought some pics of a festival with no info on it. I suggest to remove them and potentially include them into an article on the festival, because they are misleading on the city. All I see is the Macedonian flag, which has little to do with the Vlach town. Next thing you know we'll see the flags of Albania and Greece. --<span style="font-family: Gothic;">[[User:Sulmues|'''<big>S</big>'''ulmues]] <sup>([[User talk:Sulmues|talk]])</sup></span> 11:02, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Line 503 ⟶ 507:
== Requested move 9 October 2022 ==
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following is a closed discussion of a [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a [[Wikipedia:move review|move review]] after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. ''
The result of the move request was: '''No consensus'''. There is a numerical majority in support here, but as Wikipedians are aware, discussions are [[WP:NOTAVOTE|not decided by democracy]]. [[WP:CONSENSUS]] is formed by examining arguments made through the lens of policy. The ngram results (which are generally a much better indicator of [[WP:COMMONNAME]] than a Google scholar search is, which only examines a small subset and only considers academic papers, not wider usage) show that the combined total of "Moscopole" variants exceeds that of "Voskopojë" variants. The point was also made that this settlement has two distinct histories, a historical city and a modern small hamlet, and it is reasonable for those opposers to give more weight to the name of the settlement as it was when it was a large city. Overall, I don't see a consensus to move, after 11 days and extensive discussion. — [[User:Amakuru|Amakuru]] ([[User talk:Amakuru|talk]]) 09:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
----
[[Moscopole]] → {{no redirect|Voskopojë}} –
Line 553 ⟶ 561:
::::::::::The conclusion we can take out of this is that Moscopole is probably an ethnically mixed settlement nowadays. I don't think it then makes much sense to consider the "local name" aspect here. [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 18:43, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::::::::The Aromanians certainly are not 5% in Voskopoja. 24% of the population did not declare ethnicity, and obviously the vast majority are Aromanians. So in Voskopoja we have around 70% Albanians and around 30% Aromanians with some Macedonians and Greeks. {{tq|I don't think it then makes much sense to consider the "local name" aspect here}} then, as per the relevant polocy, the offical name (Voskopoja) should be used. [[User:Ktrimi991|Ktrimi991]] ([[User talk:Ktrimi991|talk]]) 18:51, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::::::::De
:::::::::::So even according to Greece, a country which at the time tended to overblow the Aromanian component
::::::::::::Sorry, but even if the Aromanians are not the absolute majority of the population, Moscopole still remains as the most common name for this locality in English-language sources. This remains as the main policy when discussing the titles of geographical places. The "local name" aspect only gave further strength to the choice of Moscopole; now that it has been shown that Albanians constitute a solid, possibly majoritarian sector of the population, the user closing this RM may need to balance different factors to decide the outcome of the RM. "Moscopole" is more common than "Voskopojë" in English, Albanians are possibly more numerous in Moscopole than Aromanians, Moscopole was a historical ethnic Aromanian center still impacting their scholarly classification into subgroups while the history of Albanians in Moscopole and the impact it has had over them is recent and mild, "Voskopojë" is the official name.
::::::::::::{{tq|He does not say it is mixed ''today''}} at most three generations passed. Not much must have changed. Definitively not a "mixed" to "Albanian" shift. {{tq|Consider the fact that large numbers Aromanians have migrated to Greece because of their pro-Greek feelings.}} emigration from Albania to Greece is a general phenomenon without ethnicity. We should not attempt to use this hypothetical case as it could go two ways, unless one is supported by academic sources, which is something most likely not studied.
::::::::::::And for the record, I don't want the statement {{tq|So in Voskopoja we have around 70% Albanians and around 30% Aromanians with some Macedonians and Greeks.}} by user Ktrimi991 to go unreplied and therefore "assumed" as a truth for the rest of the discussion. It is quite possible this is close to the ethnic reality but I expect a number of the people with self-declared Albanian ethnicity to be assimilated Aromanians or people with mixed ethnicity (someone 50/50 would probably be proud of their Aromanian blood but feel primarily Albanian), and also some of the people who did not declare ethnicity to be Albanians, due to personal reasons they might have wished to hide their identity. There's a lot of circumstances to consider. [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 20:00, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Albanians are the majority population in Voskopoje today, and largely have been so since the 20th century (Betsos' report). Now, de Rapper said "Muslim Albanians settled in the village during the communist period and that as a result of this, the local Christians started seeing the village as "mixed"." He is therefore making the argument it was '''religiously''' mixed, not ethnically. Therefore, the Christian people he is talking about may very well be Albanians. More on him, he actually preffers using '''Voskopojë''', and says that: "{{tquote|This is particularly the case in Voskopojë and Vithkuq, which have a specific relationship to the outside world. Both villages are not only considered as former prosperous Christian cities; according to a part of the local population and to some historians, the two cities '''were in those times in majority or exclusively inhabited by Aromanians, locally known as Vlachs (Vllah), who flew away at the time of the destruction'''}}" and, finally: {{tquote|After several assaults and destruction by its Muslim neighbours, Voskopojë is no more than a big village in which '''Aromanian population is not in majority anymore'''. Albanian-speaking Christians and Muslims have come and settled, especially after the Second World War, when life conditions became more attractive in what was turned into an administrative centre rather than in remote mountain villages.}} So yet again, the local name, as well as the official one, is '''''Voskopojë'''''. [[User:Alltan|Alltan]] ([[User talk:Alltan|talk]]) 20:12, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
::::::::::::::{{tquote|the history of Albanians in Moscopole and the impact it has had over them is recent and mild}}, this is not an accurate statement at all. This article in general might need some work. [[User:Alltan|Alltan]] ([[User talk:Alltan|talk]]) 20:18, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''': I feel that the nom simply provided arguments '''against''' the move. Voskopoje/a is simply not the most common name, as clearly explained. It's sad that this has turned into Balkan-POV pushing.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 04:57, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::@Alltan: Even the book that you quote is using "Moschopolis" [[https://books.google.com/books?hl=el&id=01JoAAAAMAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=MOSCHOPOLIS]]. Yet another argument to object the move.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 05:03, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
*'''Support Voskopojë'''. Again, when two or more variants have a very close result and none show a clear advantage, then the official or local names are preferred. This was also explained in similar RMs and I don't understand why insisting on which has 5% or 10% more results than the other. --'''[[User:Bes-ART|<span style="background-color: #E41E20; color: #FFFFFF; padding: 2px;">'''Bes-ART'''</span>]][[User talk:Bes-ART|<span style="background-color: #6D6D6C; color: #FFFFFF; padding: 2px;">Talk</span>]]''' 17:24, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
*''when two or more variants have a very close result and none show a clear advantage, then the official or local names are preferred.''? Is that a new rule in wikipedia? Also what makes Voskopoja the official name when this settlement was a famous metropolis (not a tiny village), i.e. at 18th century?[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 23:58, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
::<small>Notifications have been posted to all related wiki-projects (Albania, Greece, N.Macedonia, Bulgaria, Romania, cities).[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 00:34, 13 October 2022 (UTC)</small>
:I think in this discussion the "official name" is Voskopojë/a because the article covers a settlement that exists in the present and the present official name is Voskopojë/a per the Albanian government.
:An example of a city with a historical name different from the modern one is [[Edo]] / [[Tokyo]] - split in two articles, though the challenge would be finding the right period in history at which to make the cut-off. I see this was discussed a bit a decade ago but nothing came of it. However, looking deeper into this, I don't think a split makes sense here, as the present-day settlement is much smaller than it was historically, so an article about Voskopojë/a (with the Moscopole era split out) would be pretty short. It's hard to find an example of a city that was dominated by one culture at its peak and is now dominated by another as a mere village, while at no point being actually abandoned.
:I think [[WP:MPN]] applies here: ''For an article about a place whose name has changed over time... For articles discussing the present... use the modern English name... Names have changed both because cities have been formally renamed and because cities have been taken from one state by another; in both cases, however, we are interested in what reliable English-language sources now use''. Reading everything above, I'm still not sure what reliable English-language sources now use. I wonder if one or the other is clearly preferred among the reliable sources already in use in the article. --[[User:Local hero|<span color="blue">Local hero</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Local hero|<span color="dark yellow">talk</span>]]</sup> 05:26, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' As per Super Ψ Dro, Moscopole becomes the most common name without smoothing, especially since recent years. Given the Kyiv precedent, this becomes even more significant.
:Apart from that I think "Moscopoli"/"Moscopolis"/"Moschopoli" should be added together, as variants of the same name. Greek and Aromanian essentially use the same name, and the differences that result from each language's grammar essentially disappear in the English versions. Therefore the lead of the current name becomes significant.
:Finally, this article is mostly about an Aromanian city that got destroyed, and essentially on its ruins lies a modern Albanian village. There is a much stronger preference for the current name when it comes to the former. And, even in cases where the old name is not really used anymore in English, such as Constantinople, there is a separate article for each period. In this case Moscopole seems to still be used, and the modern village probably isn't significant enough to get its own article separate from the earlier city, but, if an article is to be named "Voskopojë", it should be the result of a split. --[[User:Antondimak|Antondimak]] ([[User talk:Antondimak|talk]]) 05:53, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
* '''Support''' THe most widely used name in English, the local name and the official name is Voskopokjë. [[User:Durraz0|Durraz0]] ([[User talk:Durraz0|talk]]) 12:16, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
::Nope, it is not the most widely used name in English. [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 13:06, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
* '''Support''' The official name is Voskopokjë. [[User:Karadakli230|Karadakli230]] ([[User talk:Karadakli230|talk]]) 19:18, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
::That alone has no weight. [[WP:OFFICIALNAMES]]. [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 18:05, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' per excellent arguments by Super Dromaeosaurus. I believe it is important to also look on the quality of sources behind quantity: The current title not only is being the more common title, but also it happens to be the term used in the majority of the sources which refer to the Aromanian city of Moscopole more than to the present day's small Albanian village on that location. The historical city is what the article is more about and this is owed to its historical significance: both in terms of history, notability, culture and religion. I do not know cases in Wikipedia where a small insignificant village's alternate name may replace the name of the much more historically significant city of Moscopole thanks to which the village is ever notable nowadays. The small Albanian village is hardly any significant to even warrant its own article at all. Any notability it enjoys today as a village, is solely due to Moscopole's rich heritage. --- <span style="text-shadow:#CCC 0.1em 0.3em 0.3em; font-family: Trebuchet MS">[[User:SilentResident|❖ ''SilentResident'' ❖]] <sup>([[User talk:SilentResident|talk ✉]] | [[Special:Contributions/SilentResident|contribs ✎]])</sup></span> 22:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
::Yes, this is another argument I expressed that SilentResident has worded more appropriately. Most references in academia to Moscopole refer to the old city, when it was an Aromanian-majority settlement. Few works are dedicated to the modern village. [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 13:29, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
* '''Support''' per nom. As highlighted in the Google Scholar results, Voskopojë is the common name. Additionally, if we take into account the other platforms, as was stated above by Bes-ART, when two or more variants have a very close result and none show a clear advantage, then the official or local names are preferred, which in this case is still Voskopojë. [[User:Botushali|Botushali]] ([[User talk:Botushali|talk]]) 00:42, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
* '''Support Voskopojë''' per nom. [[User:Truthseeker2006|Truthseeker2006]] ([[User talk:Truthseeker2006|talk]]) 14:16, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
{{Reflist}}
*'''Oppose''' per above arguments. [[User:Rreagan007|Rreagan007]] ([[User talk:Rreagan007|talk]]) 18:06, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
*'''Support''' per nom. The official name and the most widely used name in English. [[User:Lezhjani1444|Lezhjani1444]] ([[User talk:Lezhjani1444|talk]]) 19:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
{{Comment}} The pro-move voters claim the proposed name being more common which is not true. Also the pro-move voters seem to ignore the fact that in their majority, the sources focuse on the historical city, not the small village in its place. The participants are reminded that it isn't the number of votes that determines a RM's outcome, but the strength of arguments supported by the evidence. --- <span style="text-shadow:#CCC 0.1em 0.3em 0.3em; font-family: Trebuchet MS">[[User:SilentResident|❖ ''SilentResident'' ❖]] <sup>([[User talk:SilentResident|talk ✉]] | [[Special:Contributions/SilentResident|contribs ✎]])</sup></span> 21:06, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
:*It ''is'' more common than Moscopole in all academic publications and this is something which is discussed in the first post of the move request. Opposing the move because 250 years ago it was known to the outside world with another name is not a valid reason to oppose. If you argue that Voskopojë/Voskopoja hasn't been yet established as the most widely used English name, this isn't an argument against renaming the article. Wikipedia uses modern names and a move request is successful because when no widely used English name exists, the local, official name becomes the new article title.
:*I'm manually checking major academic publishing houses which due to paywall aren't listed on google scholar.
:**[[Springer Science+Business Media|Springer]]: [https://link.springer.com/search?query=Moscopole Moscopole] '''4''', [https://link.springer.com/search?query=Voskopoja Voskopoja] '''11''', [https://link.springer.com/search?query=Voskopoj%C3%AB Voskopojë] '''9'''. --[[User:Maleschreiber|Maleschreiber]] ([[User talk:Maleschreiber|talk]]) 00:02, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
:*Let me add on this about googlebooks: [https://www.google.gr/search?q=voskopoja&biw=1525&bih=674&tbm=bks&sxsrf=ALiCzsZ1rmuzgssfbdoi5K4gKtd_TlLFYg%3A1665855497372&ei=CfBKY76lFqqt5NoP956t2AY&ved=0ahUKEwj-zaup4-L6AhWqFlkFHXdPC2sQ4dUDCAg&uact=5&oq=voskopoja&gs_lcp=Cg1nd3Mtd2l6LWJvb2tzEAM6BQgAEIAEOgcIABCABBATULQKWJ0ZYNgaaABwAHgAgAGFAYgB_gSSAQQxMC4xmAEAoAEBwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz-books Moscopolis '''9,090'''] while ''only'' [https://www.google.gr/search?q=voskopoja&biw=1525&bih=674&tbm=bks&sxsrf=ALiCzsZ1rmuzgssfbdoi5K4gKtd_TlLFYg%3A1665855497372&ei=CfBKY76lFqqt5NoP956t2AY&ved=0ahUKEwj-zaup4-L6AhWqFlkFHXdPC2sQ4dUDCAg&uact=5&oq=voskopoja&gs_lcp=Cg1nd3Mtd2l6LWJvb2tzEAM6BQgAEIAEOgcIABCABBATULQKWJ0ZYNgaaABwAHgAgAGFAYgB_gSSAQQxMC4xmAEAoAEBwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz-books Voskopoja '''2,570'''] and [https://www.google.gr/search?q=Voskopoje&biw=1525&bih=674&tbm=bks&sxsrf=ALiCzsZ1rmuzgssfbdoi5K4gKtd_TlLFYg%3A1665855497372&ei=CfBKY76lFqqt5NoP956t2AY&ved=0ahUKEwj-zaup4-L6AhWqFlkFHXdPC2sQ4dUDCAg&uact=5&oq=Voskopoje&gs_lcp=Cg1nd3Mtd2l6LWJvb2tzEAM6BQgAEIAEOgcIABCABBATUJgRWOUbYMUeaAFwAHgAgAEtiAGDA5IBAjEwmAEAoAEBwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz-books Voskopoje 1,160]. Definitely the arguments for a move into the proposed title are extremely weak, Moschopolis and in general the M- forms outnumber Voskopoja/e by 3 to 1. I kindly asked the nominator to provide decent arguments for the move but no reply so far.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 17:42, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
:::Why are you using the Greek GoogleBooks? ('''.gr''')? [[User:Ktrimi991|Ktrimi991]] ([[User talk:Ktrimi991|talk]]) 19:49, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
::::The search results aren't displayed properly, there's no date range and English hasn't been picked as language. To check the actual results of gbooks - which is a subset of google scholar - you have to go to the last page because the figures displayed aren't the actual search results. If Alexikoua did all that, he would find out that there aren't 9,090 hits of "Moscopolis" but close to a hundred between 2000-2022.--[[User:Maleschreiber|Maleschreiber]] ([[User talk:Maleschreiber|talk]]) 00:49, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::The result is the same and Voskopja/e is still outnumbered by 1 vs 3. Why should be ignore the bibliography of the 1990s? [[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 04:11, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
:::::1990-1999 (publications in English): [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Voskopoj%C3%AB%22+OR+%22Voskopoja%22+OR+%22Voskopoje%22&hl=de&lr=lang_en&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=1990&as_yhi=1999 23] (Voskopojë & variants), [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Moscopole%22&hl=de&lr=lang_en&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=1990&as_yhi=1999 6] (Moscopole), [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Moschopolis%22+OR+%22Moscopolis%22&hl=de&lr=lang_en&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=1999&as_yhi=2000 10] (Moschopolis & variants).--[[User:Maleschreiber|Maleschreiber]] ([[User talk:Maleschreiber|talk]]) 09:13, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
:'''Comment''' Honestly, I don't care what the name of the page is, but I do want to say this: Moscopole is probably the best thing to use for the town in the Ottoman period, while Voskopoja is better for the modern period. A lot has changed in between. See also Gdansk/Danzig etc. --[[User:Calthinus|Calthinus]] ([[User talk:Calthinus|talk]]) 18:21, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
::Nice note: Actually the current article refers 90% to the old prosperous town, but nevertheless the nominator wants everything to be part of the modern name that concerns the current tiny village.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 03:09, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
*'''Support''' There is no "common name" in English. The alternate names do not have a large difference in usage when compared with each other. So, per the relevant policy, the one used in a modern rather than historical context should be used. WP:NCGN says {{tq|'''When a widely accepted English name, <u>in a modern context</u>, exists for a place, we should use it'''. This will often be a local name, or one of them; but not always. If the place does not exist anymore, or the article deals only with a place in a period when it held a different name, the widely accepted historical English name should be used. If neither of these English names exist, the modern official name (in articles dealing with the present) or the modern local historical name (in articles dealing with a specific period) should be used.}} It is obvious from online research (GB, GS etc) that Moscopole is preferred by history books, and Voskopojë is almost always used by books concerned with modern issues, news agencies and tourism articles. These matters are also addressed by [[WP:NCGN]] when it says that : {{tq|If no name can be shown to be widely accepted in English, use the local name}}. If that is not enough, then per [[WP:OFFICIALNAMES]] the offical name should be used. Which is the official name can't be disputed by anyone. There is only one. In all options provided by the relevant policy, Voskopojë is the ones to be used. If editors can't agree on which is the most used name, then the policy says the local offical one should be used. [[User:Ktrimi991|Ktrimi991]] ([[User talk:Ktrimi991|talk]]) 20:06, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
::@Ktrimi991: Well, the Ottoman metropolis was not known under the Albanian name, google are simply not in favor of the proposed title. I have the strong feeling that your argument is completely anachronistic and wrong.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 03:09, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
:::Nowhere is the naming policy it is said that a place with several names during its history should have its article named after a previous name of the place. For example, [[Butrint]] was named Buthrotum in its heyday as a major city, and it was named Butrint only when it was in ruins. But still the article is named Butrint, not Buthrotum. I have a strong feeling that you have never read the relevant policy. [[User:Ktrimi991|Ktrimi991]] ([[User talk:Ktrimi991|talk]]) 08:56, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
* '''Support''' move to '''Voskopojë''' because it is the common ''modern'' name: Moscopole has 44,000 hits on Google, Voskopojë has 135,000 hits. According to [[WP:NCGN]]: "The title: When a widely accepted English name, in a ''modern'' context, exists for a place, we should use it." Academic sources do not reflect commonality as much as they reflect history. The first [[WP:CRITERIA]] is recognizability, which has been met by the Google search. The second criteria states "Such a title usually conveys what the subject is actually called in English." The third criteria is precision and we are precisely talking about the village that exists today, the article lead starts with "is a village" and the section on geography confirms that the article is about the place there today. If the present village and the historical centre that it once was cannot even be compared then make the word "Moscopole" a redirect to the history section of the article, it would be more precise to do so.[[User:Cardofk|Cardofk]] ([[User talk:Cardofk|talk]]) 08:53, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
* '''Support''' per nomination and above arguments by [[User:Ktrimi991|Ktrimi991]] and [[User:Cardofk|Cardofk]]. – [[User:Βατο|Βατο]] ([[User talk:Βατο|talk]]) 10:24, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.</div><!-- from [[Template:Archive bottom]] -->
</div><div style="clear:both;"></div>
== There is no proof of two Gregory's in the printing press of Moscopole ==
Maximilian Peyfuss, that is the most credible source for the printing press of Moscopole, shows how the hypothesis on two Gregory's has no scientific backing. Gregory Konstandinidis, later became the Metropolitan of Durrës, and that is stated by Zabiras who was his contemporary. [[User:Anna Comnena|Anna Comnena]] ([[User talk:Anna Comnena|talk]]) 22:07, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
:Are you able to provide reliable sources to back this claim? [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 23:20, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
::I will give e brief outline: In the case of Gregory the burden of proof falls on those who back the two-Gregories hypothesis. This second hypothesis was first made by [http://www.promacedonia.org/is2/is_2_8.htm#1_4 Ivan Snegarov in 1932] (p. 354–5), basing it on some older notes by Zabiras (before 1804) where Gregory is mentioned in 1761 and 1767 ([https://books.google.be/books?id=87JSAAAAcAAJ 1872], p. 236, 244). After this, Albanian and Greek scholars have been following the same line of thought. However, in 1989 Max Demeter Peyfuss wrote a book on the printing press of Moscopole, becoming the main source for it and all the publications made there. Peyfuss shows how there is no scientific basis for claiming the existence of two Gregories in Moscopole. Furthermore, on Zabiras notes (shown above) both accounts lists books that are printed by the same person. Thus, giving the final proof that it is indeed only one Gregory.
::I will no go further into detail here. It seems a good idea to expand the article on Gregory to include all the different hypothesis on his identity. I will just note, that this article was recently merged, going through the regular process.
::Here are some sources:
::Max Demeter Peyfuß (1989). ''Die Druckerei von Moschopolis 1731-1769'' (Vienna). p. 47-94 (German)
::ИванЬ СнегаровЬ (1932). ''Охридска архиепископија, организација на цркви, црковни лица,'' Sofia: НУБ Св. Климент Охридски 1932, p. 354–5 (Bulgarian)
::Evlogio Kurilas (1930). ''Gregorios Argirokastritis,'' Athens, Theologia, p. 263-266 (Greek)
::Geōrgios Iōannēs Zabiras (1872). ''Νεα Ελλας η Ελληνικον θεατρον,'' p. 236, 244 (Greek)
::Dhimitër Shuteriqi (1987). ''Marin Beçikemi dhe shkrime të tjera,'' Tirana, p. 105 (Albanian) [[User:Anna Comnena|Anna Comnena]] ([[User talk:Anna Comnena|talk]]) 07:30, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
:::I see. Yes, I believe it would be good to expand the article to include these issues. By the way, if Georgios Konstantinidis and Gregory of Durrës are the same person, what gives the Albanian name priority? Was he an ethnic Albanian? [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 10:12, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
::::There is no consensus on his ethnic identity. Peyfuss does not talk about it at all. He might have been Aromanian, or even Greek, or indeed Albanian. During the 18th century the Patriarchy of Ohrid, as Heinrich Gelzer (1902) claims, was at the center of a movement that promoted local languages: Bulgarian, Albanian and Aromanian. It was as part of this movement that translations like that of Gregory happened. So, to get back to you last question, Gregory of Durrës is not his Albanian name (that would be Gregori i Durrësit), it is his English name, with 'Durrës' the current recognized name for this city in English. Hope that answered you questions. [[User:Anna Comnena|Anna Comnena]] ([[User talk:Anna Comnena|talk]]) 14:56, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
==Voskopoja in both Ottoman sources and Mitrou?==
A recent addition states that Ottoman documents from the 16th-17th centuries use the variant ''Voskopoja'', nevertheless Ottoman documents mention the following forms (from the very first appearance in records in 1697): Uskopol and later Iskupol, Oskopol. What's also surprising is that Mitrou mentions one name for this settlement ''Βοσκόπολις'' /Voskopolis not Vokopoja.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 03:41, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
:Yet another issue that needs to be addressed: why Moschopolis is the ''Aromanian'' rendering of the name. Is there a approach explanation on this?[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 03:45, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
::Considering the Aromanian and Greek names are similar and the region was not in a traditionally Greek zone, I would expect it if this form first surged from the Aromanians. Though an explanation from the author should be provided indeed. [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 07:55, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
:This is worth taking a look into. Can you send some sources talking about Mitrou's work? [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 07:55, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
* The new additions need some copyediting. For example, I don't understand this sentence: {{tq|In this way, regarding the events of the years 1660-1687, in agreements concluded between the monks of the monasteries, the notables and the archons of the three districts of the city, where the name of the city is given in the form ''Voskopoja''.}} There are more such examples. [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 07:55, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
:::I can't understand it either. Indeed the addition appears problematic. About Mitrou;s description on Moscopole ([[http://digital.lib.auth.gr/record/126829/files/?ln=el]] vol.6 p. 307): "εις τούτα τα μέρη είναι πολίσματα ακουστά ''Βοσκόπολις'', Γκιόρτσα και τα λοιπά". Guess we have yet another case of misinterpreting primary material by Xhufi (and it's not the only such case of presenting primary sources the wrong way in his Vokospoja paper). [[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 17:38, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
::::I remember edit warring over the use of Xhufi. Was that settled? Is he a reliable source? [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">メ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 18:08, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
:::::Xhufi was removed in cases his claims were controversial vs scholarship (or at least a better source tag was added on sporadic cases). The case was settled as Xhufi controversy subsided (as coordinator stated). Its problematic to say the least.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 21:04, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
::::::I believe the precise quotes are needed for the recent additions in order to see if we can perform further adjustments to the section. {{ping|Alltan}}, can you provide them?[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 21:11, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
:::::::If you have CEEOL access you can see them (and you do because you have access to the Wikipedia library). Adding the quotes for every single bit of text from Xhufi will result in copyright infringement issues. If you are unable to find it, I can link it here: [https://www-ceeol-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/search/viewpdf?id=602134] I will make some adjustments to the additions when I have more time. Meanwhile stop accusing Xhufi without first seeing what he has to say. Ty [[User:Alltan|Alltan]] ([[User talk:Alltan|talk]]) 21:23, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
::::::::''stop accusing Xhufi without first seeing what he has to say.'' re: No, I'm stating that he is misrepresenting primary material and I proved that this material doesn't confirm Xhufi's statement. Mitrou doesn't use ''Voskopja'' he uses ''Βοσκόπολις'' (the later not an Albanian form). I also can't find where Xhufi supports the claim that: ''The city appears under the Albanian rendering Voskopoja in Ottoman documents from the 16th-17th centuries.'', can you provide us the specific quote? [[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 21:44, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::{{u|Alltan}}, {{u|Alexikoua}}, a disclaimer. I've seen the absolutely undesirable disputes that have surged among Albanian and Greek editors in other articles. I would like it if this article stayed as a bastion of tranquility. So please let's avoid easily avoidable tone such as {{tq|Meanwhile stop accusing Xhufi...}}. I will also apply this advice on me.
:::::::::As for the quote of the text (which by the way occurs on pages 1[actually 9]-2[10], not 2-3[11] as cited in this article), it is the following: {{tq|We note on the other hand that, in the Ottoman documents that we have used, we systematically find the name under the variant "Voskopoja" and this fact does not seem to us to be unimportant. This form is also that used by Meletios, an 18th century author, in his geography text.}} The affirmation on the text seems to simply be wrong, unless Xhufi is analysing ''Voskopolis'' together with ''Voskopoja'' and separate from ''Moskopolis''. Not sure what to do here. [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 14:37, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::Xhufi is indeed considering the variants ''Voskopoja'' and ''Voskopolis'' together: {{tq|Indeed, this agglomeration appears late in historical documents under the name Voskopoja-Voskopol or under its other variant Moskopol.}} page 9. That the text in this article would only focus on ''Voskopoja'' would then be inappropriate. Apparently, after adressing he is analysing both variants together, he affirms {{tq|Under these circumstances, it can be assumed that the Voskopoja form was the oldest, used mainly by the Albanian population}} (page 10), even though ''Voskopolis'' is an obviously Greek form. He also calls variants starting with M (in contrast to those starting with V, that's how he apparently decided to split the ways of calling this settlement) as Aromanian even though ''Moskopolis'' is the most widely used Greek form and Aromanians also use forms starting with V.
:::::::::The "16th-17th centuries" part is indeed said by Xhufi in page 10. Whether it is factual is another thing. [[User:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#0099FF;">Super</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#800080;">Ψ</span>]] [[User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus|<span style="color:#E60026;">Dro</span>]] 14:46, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
::::::::::I admit the author is interpreting various primary&secondary sources on a non-scholarly way. As you said he states 'Voskopoja' but it is obvious that this is the case of 'Voskopolis' or any other V- form form. All issues need to be addresed on a detailed basis. The list is big though.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 02:39, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::::Before presenting a complete list it seems helpful to add that scholarship on the onomatological evidence in Moscopole presents a completely diferrent picture compared to Xhufi's conclusion.[[User:Alexikoua|Alexikoua]] ([[User talk:Alexikoua|talk]]) 02:54, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
| |||