Hello! I noticed you've made edits or that you are in some way connected to Albania or Albanians related articles. We are a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Albania and Albanians related topics and are organized within WikiProject Albania. I thought that you may be interested in viewing the current tasks of our WikiProject or its talk page and get involved. Furthermore, if you are interested in joining the wikiproject, please feel free to add your name in the Participants' page!. Thank you and, again, welcome among us!

Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:49, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It would be better to initiate a discussion in the correspondent talkpage in cases of controversial additions. We need to follow carefully wp:BRD circle. Thank you.Alexikoua (talk) 20:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the 2011 census, it wasn't boycotted by the Greek minority, but it was strongly criticized by the European Council. On the quality of the specific data the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities stated that "the results of the census should be viewed with the utmost caution and calls on the authorities not to rely exclusively on the data on nationality collected during the census in determining its policy on the protection of national minorities." You can see it for yourself here [1]. It can't be used for places inhabited by the Greek minority.

Regarding Kallivretakis, there is nothing outdated about his research. There is no source that says the ethnic composition of the village has changed since 1995. To challenge Kallivretakis, you need a source that says the ethnic composition of the village has changed. You do not have that. Khirurg (talk) 02:34, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then write that it was strongly criticized by the EC. And, in fact, it was boycotted:

"calls to boycott the census have also come by Greek minority organization, Omonia, and the Greek minority party, PBDNJ." (Balkan Insight)

"Most of minority representatives embraced our call for boycotting the census" (unpo.org)

And regarding the fact that there was a strong emigration to Greece since the last years, and decades, it is completely clear that Kallivretakis sources are not to be used (WP:BLUESKY). As I once said at Dropull, I'm not challenging the Greek majority or minority of specific regions, it's just the fact that we're (or better you are) using a 27-year-old source which was also challenged by serveral other Wikipedia editors. Things definitely have changed, especially on the Albanian Riviera since the massive boost of the tourism since the last years. I think it is a good solution to just write "According to..., in 1993 that and this was present". AlexBachmann (talk) 22:00, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you're gonna see this, therefore I'll tag you. @Khirurg AlexBachmann (talk) 22:01, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom line is, you don't have a source that the demographic composition of Dhermi has changed since 1995. {{Things definitely have changed especially on the Albanian Riviera]] is original research. Wikipedia is based on reliable sources only, not what some users think has "changed on the Albanian Riviera". Khirurg (talk) 00:14, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't play the dumb one, again, Kallivretakis will not be allowed in regards under the circumstances of the strong emigration wave to Greece. You know how many Greeks emigrated from Albania. Therefore it is impossible to view his work as valid today.

I don't understand why you're constantly hanging on Kallivretakis, don't you have a newer, better source? I mean you can't write "This and that village is solely/primary inhabited by Greeks" while the source's from 1995? So I'm asking you, if you have a better source that sustains Kallivretakis opinion while still being valid today? AlexBachmann (talk) 22:36, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I can write that using Kallivretakis, because you don't have a source that says that Albanians have moved into the village (and I mean permenently moved in, not seasonal workers in the tourism industry). It doesn't matter how many Greeks emigrated, the village is still Greek unless you can show that Albanians moved in, which you can't. Wikipedia is based on reliable sources, and I have one and you don't. And if you edit war you can explain why you are removing sources using Things definitely have changed especially on the Albanian Riviera to the admins. Khirurg (talk) 00:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. Regarding all facts that I've listed it would be better to let a admin decide. We still haven't reached consensus and you, full of haste (as always), are reverting the disputed content. AlexBachmann (talk) 16:04, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record: Ktrimi991 agreed with me on Dropull, and Maleschreiber stated that Kallivretakis himself is outdated. AlexBachmann (talk) 16:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have added the Albanian name to the first line of the lede for several places in Greece, claiming an Albanian presence. In some cases, I was convinced, and let it stay. Now you object to adding the Greek and Aromanian names to a town that has a well known Greek and Aromanian presence? You can't have it both ways. Khirurg (talk) 22:37, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to point out that @Alexikoua was the one that removed it and you therefore should reach consensus before adding it. AlexBachmann (talk) 22:38, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure Alexikoua would not have a problem with my edit. If you think he would, you can ask him. Anyway, your latest edit is fine. Khirurg (talk) 22:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not my job. I'll agree with you on Arta. AlexBachmann (talk) 22:41, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

However on Greeks in Albania my edit has relevance because that may have influenced the number of "ethnic" Greeks living there. AlexBachmann (talk) 22:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't. This is clearly referring to Albanian migrants in Greece. There is no known cases of Albanians in Albania declaring themselves Greek. It makes no sense, nor is there any benefit for them. Khirurg (talk) 22:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But that's what the source says. They should declare themselves as Greek in order to get a permit to work in Greece because, obviously, the economy is much better there than in Albania. AlexBachmann (talk) 22:50, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the place to do that is Greece. They can't get a work permit for Greece in Albania. Once they're in Greece, it makes total sense. But there is no way to get a work permit in Albania. Khirurg (talk) 22:52, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The source says that it "allegedly encouraged the process of the Greek irrdentism [in North Epirus]" though (that are probably not the exact words but you can read the source too). AlexBachmann (talk) 22:55, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well the source says "allegedly". It's not a certainty. The source is being careful and also doesn't explain how Albanians in Greece claiming to be Greeks encourages irredentism in another country. By the way, have a look at my latest edit at Vikos gorge, I think that should be ok now. Khirurg (talk) 22:59, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly what I wrote, "allegedly". And it says that it has a impact. What about writing "It has been suggested" or something like that? The solution on Vikos is convienient for me. AlexBachmann (talk) 23:06, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, fine. "It has been suggested" would be ok. Khirurg (talk) 23:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Read these comments (by an Albanian user) [2] [3] to see what I'm talking about. There are literally tons of sources on this, it's very very easy to add even more than what is in the article now. Khirurg (talk) 23:20, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

The thread wasn't started by me, but the OP failed to notify you so I'm doing it on their behalf. 192.76.8.84 (talk) 20:16, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! AlexBachmann (talk) 20:20, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am writing to inform you that a discussion regarding the content of the article Talk:Vurg#Lefter Talo has been taking place on its talk page, and it has reached a point where it seems necessary to bring it to the attention of the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. I wanted to give you a heads up since you have been involved in the discussion, [[4]] Thank You! RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 20:12, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that I prevented the possibility of a neutral statement. Didn't know that my comment counts as the third opinion. AlexBachmann (talk) 20:16, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's absolutely no problem. We moved the article to the respective noticeboard since it's 4 of us involved. The discussion already had 3 participants before your comment. Just wanted to inform everyone who took part in the discussion. Thank You! RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 20:30, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff like this really needs to stop [5]. It's a perfectly good academic source from 1996. WP:AGEMATTERS does not apply, in fact it just sounds like a really weak excuse to remove a source that you seem to find inconvenient. This is not the first time you do this either. Stop using excuses to remove sources you don't like. You are damaging the encyclopedia, seriously. Khirurg (talk) 04:13, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please familiarize yourself with the Wikipedia policies before accusing other editors of "damaging" Wikipedia. AlexBachmann (talk) 22:32, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Competence is required. No admins made any decision regarding the content you are trying to add. You are either misrepresenting or not getting it. Either way, this is starting to become a serious problem. IF you do not stop with this nonsense, I will report you. This is getting expasperating. First the Olympic games, then Aphrodite, now this. Enough. Khirurg (talk) 22:51, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, the user is not an admin. However, that doesn't change the fact that the user disagrees with your POV. Let's wait for an admins decision. Do you want to report me for providing sources and discussing (which you aren't)? The whole thing about Aphrodite has also been seriously discussed at the page, we are still waiting for reactions from other scholars. Of you think there is a serious problem about content that you don't like, go ahead. AlexBachmann (talk) 16:17, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:14, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alex. You've started two ANI reports against Keremmaarda already. I've given them a final warning, they are using fringe sources or no sources at all to hide Ottoman losses and put lower army estimates for their army throughout warfare articles, as you likely know. I will notify you if I start an ANI report, so you can expose your personal attack concers from them, if you're okay with it. Regards, Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 15:28, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Feel free to notify me on the talk page whenever you need help. Cheers. AlexBachmann (talk) 16:53, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a standard message to inform you that the Arab–Israeli conflict is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 06:33, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you change kingdom of illyria and dardania i can give you sources Fielli (talk) 22:20, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fielli I'm sorry, but I can't see it. And it's already established in scholarship that Bardyllis and Cleitus were not Dardanians, but Dassaretian. The borders of Illyrian tribes were really vague and unstable, it's impossible to determine how big Illyria was in any given year. AlexBachmann (talk) 22:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Im not sure if it has come to your attention but this new user named "Vaxjo-Agoy-Tetovo-Gjovik" has been acting very strange. His talk page is very interesting as well. I think he is a troll, just by looking at all the edits he has made so far. Is there something we should do cause I'm not sure if he has broken any rules yet? Thanks again! Arberian2444 (talk) 00:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He's a weirdo. In addition to his bad English, he seems to have some kinds of strokes when writing reasonings for changes. He's been banned, fortunately. AlexBachmann (talk) 17:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok thats good. Thanks again! Arberian2444 (talk) 23:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you're one of the first users I've found that is interested in Albania, knows Albanian and is still active, so I thought I'd ask you. There is an article on Artan Cuku that says it mainly needs copy editing, but I personally found it really hard to do that. I dont understand Albanian, so I cant verify the information and dont feel qualified to make changes to style and grammar because the contained information isnt actually clear to me. Thats why I thought I'd look for somebody who maybe understands Albanian. Whether you help or not, have a nice day :) Shibabao (talk) 15:07, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I've checked the article. While some parts are unsourced, the other parts are pretty well-sourced. The lead is cluttered with insignificant titles when regarding that the highest title (First Director) is already sufficient. Some sections have a bad layout, but I don't think I can exorbitantly improve it. I'll look more into the grammar, spacing, etc. later if I have time.

However, I speak a northern dialect of Albanian which makes it sometimes a little bit difficult to understand the standardized Albanian language which is mainly based on extreme southern dialects. But from what I am able to understand, everything appears to be fine. The article does not fall under the "controversial" scope, e.g. articles like Kosovo, Niš, etc etc. So there should be no reason for someone to maliciously manipulate content, if that's the matter.

Thank you for reaching out! - AlexBachmann (talk) 15:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your quick reply!! I was kinda scared of accidentally falsifying information, especially in regards to the list at the beginning, so that really helps :-) I'll try to have a look into that article again once I've got the time to then. Thank you again. Shibabao (talk) 15:56, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings @AlexBachmann

Hi, I am User:Bookku, On Wikipedia I engage in, finding information and knowledge gap areas in Wikipedia and promoting expansion of related drafts and articles. Recently you seem to have attempted to update article Justinian I. (this info was ascertained from related changes)

Requesting your visit to Draft:Re-mosqueing of Hagia Sophia and help expand, if you find topic interesting.

Wish you very happy Wikipedia editing. Thanks and warm regards Bookku (talk) 06:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bookku!

Thank you for reaching out and for the kind message. However, I am afraid that this topic is not my field of expertise. Due to that circumstance, I think I cannot countribute anything of helpful nature.

Regardless, I hope you manage to get your article published. Good luck! AlexBachmann (talk) 00:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Doanri. I noticed that you recently removed content from Peja without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. In a discussion of a place's history, its historical names are not irrelevant Doanri (talk) 13:03, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I see you just removed it from the lead and not from the etymology bit. Doanri (talk) 13:04, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's already in the etymology section. I think it would be a strech to include the Ottoman name in the lead, as the overwhelming majority of inhabitants during Ottoman times in Peja were Albanians.

No problem, thanks. - AlexBachmann (talk) 16:19, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]