Talk:Albanian tribes

Scope, name
Glad this main article has been started. I would suggest the article name "Historical tribes in/of Albania", or perhaps "Tribes of Malesia, Dukagjin, etc" as the scope can be expanded significantly.--Z oupan 10:56, 21 May 2013 (UTC)  Blocked sock:Ajdebre.
 * Name : I created this article as the list. According to the naming convention the lists are named as: "List of....". There are a lot of tribes in Albania and therefore it is good to have this kind of list article, with brief summary containing basic information about this tribes.
 * Scope : The topic is notable and can be elaborated in more details within separate article. Immediately or as soon as the size of the text of this article becomes to big for brief introduction.
 * Like in case of the List of Serbs and Serbs there can be List of tribes of Albania and i.e. Tribes of Northern Albania. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:33, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, looking forward to seeing your finished work.--Z oupan 13:08, 21 May 2013 (UTC)  Blocked sock:Ajdebre.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of tribes of Albania. 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/20141006083419/http://dualibra.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Historical_Dictionary_of_Albania__Second_Edition.pdf to http://dualibra.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Historical_Dictionary_of_Albania__Second_Edition.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:05, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Genetics
E1b1b, J2bb and R1b all peak among (Kosovar) Albanians in the region this is true. However what the page says and what the sources say are greatly different-- the page is saying they prove the Albanian origin of tribes because they are exclusively found in Albanians-- this is entirely false as Greeks also have large percentages of all three. South Greeks: ~40% E1b1b that's higher than Tosks who are like ~28%, ~9% J2b, ~18% R1b; Montenegrins also have large amounts of E1b1b, as do Bulgarians, etc etc. It's also a classic case of WP:SYNTH. In general any claim that genetics "prove" (rahter than "support") anything about a nationalist dispute should be treated with extreme caution and reliably sourced to geneticists actually saying that it backs one claim or another, and the word "prove"/"proof" should just be avoided. In my opinion. --Yalens (talk) 16:36, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * nevermind, I didn't revert you because I say "prove" has been removed. Thanks for that.--Yalens (talk) 16:39, 30 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I tried to fix the information, that's ok now? --B A T O (talk) 17:46, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Looks good, I changed it to "most typical" as that more or less reflects the population genetics consensus at the moment. That seem fair? --Yalens (talk) 17:54, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, that's fine. --B A T O (talk) 19:01, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Map of the Albanian tribes
I'm currently designing a map of the Albanian tribes in Northern Albania. I think I will use the map op Franz Seiner, but I'm nut sure of how I will put the information on display. I could also make a map with only the tribal regions, such as Mirdita, Mat, ... without writing all the names of the tribes. I would like to have some advice on what to put on the map. N.Hoxha (talk) 18:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I wanted to use this image: https://www.theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-XII13.htm for the map, but I couldn't find the book it originally came from. If anyone could help. N.Hoxha (talk) 21:46, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * What an impressive goal!!! I definitely*100 want to help. That map isn't very good because it doesn't have any boundaries between fis regions. I would go with two layers of definition. The first would designate the sub-regions(Malësia e Madhe-Malësia e Vogël/Malësia e Gjakovës-Pult etc.) The second would have to do with the tribes themselves (Hoti, Kelmendi). The map would also have main settlements of each fis area superimposed on the modern state boundaries. You should also pick a date. Since the 17th century these areas were more or less the same, but I would go with the last date before their division by modern state-building. My choice would be "at the beginning of the Balkan Wars" or "1878" as that would include also people in the Sanjak of Nish. I could compile a list of all settlements per tribe if you want to and go through them in the map-making process tribe by tribe with proper bibliography.--Maleschreiber (talk) 10:37, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes it's true that the map of Franz isn't really that good, therefore I also linked that other map which could be more useful. But I'm not sure if I could use it, because I have no idea if it's copy righted. So I first need a good source for the drawing of the sub-regions. I think that writing the names of the tribes on the map would also be a good idea but if I draw the modern boundaries of the country, I'm afraid that the map could be overcharged and look messy. I will first draw the regions and tribes, and then we will see for the modern regions. But before that I need good maps and sources, I would be grateful if you could help me in this matter. N.Hoxha (talk) 11:40, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I've worked a lot on Hoti, so maybe you could start with this tribe. The geography section has the list of all Hoti settlements. Same with Triepshi and others. I'll try working on the geography sections of Gruda, Koja, Kelmendi so you can have full material for at least one sub-region (Malësia). You could also color-code the tribal regions and that will give you more avalaible space.--Maleschreiber (talk) 18:08, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * All right, thank you very much! N.Hoxha (talk) 18:21, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I began drawing the region, this is only a sandbox therefore everything on this map is not definite. I just want to know which design styles, colors, etc should be used. Also I think the resolution I used is quite low. N.Hoxha (talk) 16:59, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

So should the map be divided as such (?): Also the main problem is that I'm not sure how I'm going to divide the tribes from the bajraks as they often overlap each other. what would you change or do differently? But before all of that I will have to redraw the countries on a much larger scale.N.Hoxha (talk) 19:34, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Main tribal regions: Matë, Malësia, Gjakovë Highlands, ... in different colors
 * The bajraks/ sub-regions (like Hoti) of the main tribal regions, those will have a different shade of the color of the tribal region where they belong
 * Tribal settlements (?)
 * Modern regional boundaries (?)
 * I would remove the bajraks altogether. They changed a lot over time and don't really show tribal regions rather Ottoman divisions of tribal regions in certain periods. I would mark the different larger tribal areas by grouping its tribes in different color groups. I don't know if that makes it easier for you.
 * One or two settlements that were the centres of every tribe are necessary. Also, I wrote Shoshi_(region) today. On google maps many of the older municipalities of Shkodra have the same boundaries as the old tribal areas if you want to check them. Kastrati is an exception as it also has part of Hoti and also some tribes that were grouped together under the same municipality because they were too small. Modern state boundaries would also be necessary to give the readers a sense of familiarity with the location.--Maleschreiber (talk) 01:17, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

About the article's name
Some of the Albanian tribes don't live or trace their origin within Albania's borders and never did so. Some are divided between Albania and other states. What is a better article name? I think that if it was renamed to fis as in "Fis is a form of social organization that is found among Albanians since their early recorded history. The fis is a tribal community etc ...". --Maleschreiber (talk) 10:55, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I share the same opinion, maybe 'Northern Albanian tribes' or simply 'Albanian tribes' could be a better name. N.Hoxha (talk) 11:47, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I would go with Albanian tribes too. Northern Albanian tribes is limiting because some historical tribes are from the south or in modern Macedonia.--Maleschreiber (talk) 11:53, 27 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I am opposed to renaming of this article because it would be against NPOV and mislead readers about the ethnicity of members of tribes which are topic of this article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:04, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Only tribes consisting of ethnic Albanians are listed in the article, so I'm confused on how it could mislead readers. Could you elaborate? N.Hoxha (talk) 22:09, 27 February 2020 (UTC)N.Hoxha (talk)
 * How many tribes in this article that exist at least as cultural ethno-geographic areas even today are not both defined in bibliography and self-defined as ethnic Albanian tribes? Zero. Nobody's writing here that Piperi is Albanian.
 * How many of these tribes are not found wholly or partly in modern Albania and never were? Hoti, Gruda, Triepshi, Koja e Kuçit and the list goes on.--Maleschreiber (talk) 01:24, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * There is scholarly consensus about following facts regarding members of tribes of Albania:
 * they did not identify themselves on ethnic basis, but on the basis of belonging to the tribe
 * they did not identify themselves on basis of territorial belonging to Albania as toponym or country. When Albania was established as independent country in 1913 most of members of tribes of Albania rebelled struggling to be returned to suzereinty of the Ottoman empire. It was necessary for troops from Serbia to intervene and allow independent Albania to be established.
 * they descended from people of different ethnicity, not only Albanian. Even the biggest Albanophiles and Serbophobes like Elsie and Durham emphasize that their own oral tradition insisted that their ancestors came from Serb populated territories
 * the first of them begin to selfdeclare as ethnic Albanians only in the 19th century, while most of members of tribes of Albania abandoned their tribal identity and acquired ethnic identity only in 20th century.
 * Any attempt to attribute ethnicity to these tribes would be incorrect misleading of readers and against NPOV. It would serve to mislead wikipedia to promote Albanian nationalistic myths such as myth of ethnic purity of autochthonous Pelasgian/Illyrian/xyz/Albanian tribes.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:06, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Could you provide sources and links for this serious claim, ideally unbiased ones.
 * Tribes did and still do, as it is important to notice that the Communist regime didn't and couldn't erase blood ties, identify as ethnic Albanians. In fact the earliest recorded mention of the tribes self-identifying with an ethnicity was with the Albanian ethnicity.
 * The state of Albania and the Albanian ethnicity are two extremely different concepts, also I'm highly skeptical of the last part of your claim, since Serbia occupied Albanian territories and tried to annex them.
 * The tribes were originally isolated families that evolved into self-administrated clans that had common ancestry and shared social ties.
 * Elsie didn't claim that they had multiple ethnicities, but rather that some tribes changed language over time. Also note that Durham wasn't an 'Albanophile' and accusing them of being 'Serbophobes' demonstrates bad faith from your part and is extremely subjective (POV-pushing).
 * This statement actually proves the point that those tribes are ethnically Albanian, as those tribes never self-identified as ethnic Montenegrins/Serbs or with any other ethnicity. Most members didn't abandon their tribal identity in the 20th, in fact the tribal society was still largely intact when the communist regime took power in Albania and by that time they all self-identified as ethnic Albanians and they still maintained tribal identities.
 * This claim doesn't again have a NPOV and is your personal belief, I just can't understand how any ties between the well-known fact of the Albanian ethnicity of the tribes with the Pelasgians can be made? I think that you are possibly trying to push a one-sided narrative in order to gain recognition for your draft. By denying the ethnicity of the tribes, it appears that you may be suggesting that the actual descendants of those tribes aren't ethnic Albanians either, therefore implying that the vast majority of the inhabitants of Northern Albania may not even be ethnically Albanian. This would be a clear case of original research WP:OR as no reliable sources that would confirm this claim exist, it could also be perceived as an extreme nationalistic statement WP:NATIONALIST. Scholars tend to make clear destinations between Albanian and Slavic tribes. N.Hoxha (talk) 16:23, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * There is full scholarly consensus that Albanian ethnic identity started to develop only in 19th century, during the period of Albanian national awakening. It was not fully accepted well into 20th century, most Albanians rebelled against their own independent country during the Peasant Revolt in Albania suppressed by International Gendarmerie and forces from Serbia who enforced independence of Albania. Well into 20th century few people saw themselves first and foremost as Albanians while some scholars emphasize that the Albanian national feeling fully developed only after Second World War.
 * The proposed move is contested. Editors struggling to present members of tribes from Albania as ethnic Albanians should follow wikipedia rules and initiate WP:RM.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:14, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * (What does a Muslim revolt in central Albania have to do with what is being discussed here?) I started this discussion and it evolved in a very wide consensus about where this page should head to. In a discussion of about one week everybody except for you shared the same outlook. In the future, I also think that when one participates in a discussion, they should try to discuss on the basis of arguments and counter-arguments other people make. Now that this was sorted out, maybe you should enter the discussion about how this article should evolve.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maleschreiber (talk • contribs) 20:42, 3 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree, the title 'Albanian tribes' is more correct as the article is about all the Albanian tribes, not only those in Albania. – Βατο (talk) 17:01, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Support "Albanian tribes". If there is no reasonable dissent, shall we go ahead? --Calthinus (talk) 04:34, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes we shall. N.Hoxha (talk) 13:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Albanian tribes is a redirect of Tribes of Albania. How do you move the main article to a redirect?--Maleschreiber (talk) 13:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I do not agree with this move as it is completely against NPOV and look like nationalization of history to me. There was no proper discussion, nor did you listen to arguments given by the opposing editor/s. This is a great example of how not to do things on Wikipedia. I suggest that you revert the move as a sign of good faith - or I will.  Sadkσ  (talk is cheap)  00:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Um, the tribes are not "history". They remain relevant today and consist of currrent people who identify as Albanians. See also Pashtun tribes, List of Scottish clans, et cetera. Many of these have other origins: some Scottish clans have Norse origins that they are well aware of, some Pashtun tribes have all sorts of obscure foreign origins in the Middle East, India etc, but their identity in the modern day for living people is not disputed. Even if Antidiskriminator's... story... about Qamili's revolt were true (it is not) this wouldn't matter anyhow, as the page is about modern people not history.--Calthinus (talk) 04:17, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * A sign of good faith on your part would be to actually check what was discussed and agreed upon here before coming at the end of a one-week discussion to pronounce your intention to revert it. Seriously, not one tribe mentioned in this article has been defined as anything else other than Albanian. Check the articles one by one if you want to. They all begin with "X is an Albanian". And about 1/3 of the tribes mentioned in this article are not even within the borders Albania. So, on what exactly are you basing the argument that an article that also includes Triepshi should be re-named to Tribes of Albania? On what basis is Morina, a region wholly within Kosovo a tribe of the Republic of Albania? Also, you didn't participate in this one-week discussion. You came afterwards to protest that you don't like the result. There is a consensus here, if you don't like it, you can ask for a new move, but I don't think that it's very productive to come after the end of a discussion and try to force your opinion about an issue, which you weren't even interested in when it was being discussed. --Maleschreiber (talk) 02:12, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * No, as it happens I see no real discussion taking placem, only some sort of overvoting. I am not that interested in this topic, but I will protest the lack of procedure in this dicussion, which is staggering. Did you notify other interested editor, did you notify or invite other WikiProjects to join the discussion? NO, that did not happen, which is a solid basis to see this whole move as tag-teaming. As one editor before me stated - the propsed move in contested.  Sadkσ   (talk is cheap)  12:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , the user Antidiskriminator did not give reasonable arguments to oppose the renaming of the article, and you also came here opposing it without good reasons, since you contest the current consensus only reporting the NPOV policy as per se, without further argumentations. – Βατο (talk) 14:25, 4 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose lack of RfM – Antidiscriminator is right regarding the concerns about this move. I share with Sadko the opinion that there was no need to jump ahead and skip the usual procedures of moves. FkpCascais (talk) 18:59, 5 March 2020 (UTC) I read the discussion and I see reasons for both sides. I could agree the move in a sense that previous title could include the problem if then non-Albanian tribes should be included too, or, if the article refers to all tribes (families, clans) of territory of today Albania that exist today, or existed ever... Now, in any case, there is a need of confirming with RS that all declare themselves as Albanian. The new title would be more precise regarding its inclusion criterium. However, this tendency of making moves and major changes in articles after just few editors agree between themselves is wrong and that is what I most want to call here the atention for. FkpCascais (talk) 19:49, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Go through every article of a tribe that is mentioned here, friend. You won't find any that doesn't start with "X is an Albanian tribe". I also want to mention what said earlier. These people are very much alive and kicking as cultural communities. The way some people here are referring to bibliography is as if we're discussing about some ancient tribe. Nik Gjeloshaj, the mayor of Tuzi Municipality is Trieshjan. The emigrants from Koja e Kuçit in the USA have a a strongcommunity that has helped keep through the years the villages of Koja, Fundina etc. in the area in a stable economic situation. Bibliography confirms all of your questions in the articles of these tribes themselves and if you think one of those listed here can't be defined as Albanian or that it self-defines as something else, you can always remove it in the long run. I started this discussion on the basis that 1/3 of the communities mentioned in this article are not within Albania's borders and are both defined and self-define as Albanians. And it got a very quick consensus by all those who were interested in the subject matter. This was moved in about a week's time, because just one person was saying something different, without really addressing though what was being argued. I really don't get the reason for the "after-fuss" . Nothing really happened here. Best.--Maleschreiber (talk) 09:14, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * There are no doubts that nowadays this issue is alive and kicking, not only in Albania, for instance, recently a book was published specifically about my clan. It was written by my grandunckle. He was an economist, but after retireing he spent two decades intensivelly dedicated to finish that book and travelled quite a lot searching archives in many places. He was able to trace direct lineage all way to early middle ages in Montenegro. Hpwever, my clan has no links to modern state of Montenegro. They were loyal to Serbian rulers by paying them regularelly taxes and providing them man for the army. They opposed to any deals with Venetians and, when time came, they strongly opposed Ottomans. They opposed any rule that would not be Serbian and shared that atitude and mantained friendly relations, better defined as brotherhoods, with many other clans, some of them today listed as Albanian. In the struggle against Ottomans, my clan had to abandon their lands and move to Bosnia. Overtime, numbers grow, sections moved to Belgrade area, others to Kosovo, amd some to Herzegovina where participated in the numerous revolts. What happends here is that my clan had a clear, active and consistent identification with Serbia. The problem with Albanian tribes is that you are making an atempt to present events from today POV and apply it where is impossible. In your own comment you criticize Antidiskriminator for focusing in bibliography as if we were dealing with some ancient tribe (in other words, as if we were dealing with history), but next you refer how Albanian tribes "helped keep through the years the villages of Koja, Fundina etc. in the area in a stable economic situation". The problem is the lack of Albanian states, rulers, army... but your intention is to ignore this and progressivelly use this tribes locations as way to claim land and territory as if they were the rulers of them. You´ll end up labeling them as Albanian by using the modern meaning of it, as if meaning belonging to an independent Albanian state, while totally ignoring that not many generations ago Albanians still mostly lacked desires of statehood, and different tribes from different valleys couldn´t even understand eachther. That by itself raises concerns that should go trough a proper notification of such moves and clarification and ultimatelly, a consensus. FkpCascais (talk) 19:19, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Your alleged and unverifiable personal family story (you seem to have many) is not a valid argument in a discussion based on RS and policy. Please quit this non constructive carping and do not make me bring up your past public comments about the right to exist of Albania(ns) (and Romanians).--Calthinus (talk) 20:36, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * What I meant with my story is to mention that at the end of the book my grandunckle listed all documents he found, such as birth, baptism, marriage or death certificates, army conscription, participation in battles or revolts, prosecutions, etc. The cases you talked about, its shocking to see Koja e Kuçit almost completelly unsourced. FkpCascais (talk) 23:53, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Friend, this is Pretash Zeka Ulaj, the last bajraktar of Koja and its most celebrated figure. There's a bust of him right in the middle of the village. He died in 1962. Since 1944 when the Yugoslav partisans entered the village, he was hiding in the mountains, because he led an ambush against them and killed 6 soldiers. I'm obviously not getting into a political debate about the partisans or nationalism etc. here, I'm trying to explain to you that what you're making a big issue about, is self-evident to people who are familiar with the situation "on the ground". Yes, Koja e Kuçit is an article with minimal bibliography compared to Hoti, also in Montenegro. But the bibliography that is needed in Koja doesn't have to do with whether they are Albanians or not. The first dedicated monograph by a local was written in the 21st century, so when I get that book I'll be able to do more stuff. It's still in a much better condition than a few weeks ago.--Maleschreiber (talk) 01:05, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

"Only tribal system in Europe"
I will assume these are RS. However, the statement is untrue. Although tribalism is kind of symbolic now in Scotland, the taip remains a fact of life in Chechhya and Ingushetia, and other tribal systems also remain in other parts of the North Caucasus. Thoughts ? --Calthinus (talk) 12:25, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I propose to change the sentence: "and is considered one of the last examples of tribal social system surviving in Europe until the middle of the 20th century". – Βατο (talk) 13:02, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Sounds good --Calthinus (talk) 13:59, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * there are 3 RS that support it (I think there are more). I added an info as per Galaty (2011) to make it clearer, what do you think? – Βατο (talk) 14:12, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I support it, good work :) .--Calthinus (talk) 17:15, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Teip in fact remains much more a fact of life in Chechnya/Ingushetia than in Albania and the Scottish clans wouldn't think of blood feuding with each other today as in Albania. There's also the question of how much of Teip is intact and how much of it has been incorporated into modern capitalist Chechnya- "the Teip as a corporation". It's a matter of degree TBH. I think that the Albanian tribal system comes up in bibliography as the "only tribal system in Europe" mostly because of the definition of what is European. The people of the North Caucasus for geo-political reasons haven't been considered "European enough", so they're not grouped under "European tribal organization" by most anthropologists of the 20th century. In terms of comparative anthropology, whether Scottish, Albanian or Ingush, tribal organization showed many similarities across the borders. It also proved remarkably peaceful and stable compared to inter-state warfare. --Maleschreiber (talk) 11:28, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

"people in Northern America"
The page has. This is cited but I find this really inaccurate, as it assumes that "ancestral" identities in the US and Canada can be spoken of as a group and assumed to behave the same. Whether those identities are ancestral to begin with is dubious -- adopted kids into an Irish (Catholic) American family will often identify as Irish American. But they don't. Swedes are for the most part totally assimilated and possess an identity that is symbolic if it exists at all, Korean identity is much stronger with Korean churches etc etc, Italian American identity is its own rather complicated thing that would be tangential to discuss. I could sort of see what the source was going for if we talk about historic ethnic/ethnoreligious relations in Boston or NYC, but there are much better things to go for (even that is a really problematic comparison), like the current status of Scottish or Irish clans. --Calthinus (talk) 12:00, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree. Scrap it altogether if you want to. Both locals and people who originate from these areas usually maintain an identity-based relation to those areas, but this relation is subject to historical context, country of emigration and other conditions. For example, emigrants in the USA have a very strong relation to their home regions in the form of cultural associations that contribute to development there, but emigrants in Italy or elsewhere in Europe maintain close to no relation to their historical regions of origin in northern Albania.--Maleschreiber (talk) 12:17, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Classification
The classification followed in this article about the fis regions is wrong. Durham recorded the bajrak division system. That is not the fis organization. They overlap for some regions, but are very different for other ones. Some of those areas that are part of the bajrak are not fisnore in any meaningful way. The classification should be re-organized on the basis of geographical regions. These are: Malësia, Dukagjin highlands, Malësia e Gjakovës, Upper Drin, Mirdita-Puka (Leknia), Gegnia.--Maleschreiber (talk) 14:23, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Sidebar
I created a navigation sidebar. A photo or graphic image would be nice to have. Also, the list of concepts, history and culture needs expansion. ,, any ideas? --Maleschreiber (talk) 15:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Hmm well Rugova is more a region than culture. --Calthinus (talk) 16:22, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It's the Rugova (sword dance), not the region.--Maleschreiber (talk) 16:29, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah. Better to disambiguate that, then.--Calthinus (talk) 17:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * it's good! I added some titles in the list. – Βατο (talk) 17:05, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * One page that should be created: Leknia.--Calthinus (talk) 17:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Nice work! N.Hoxha (talk) 15:55, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * What could also be added is a distinction between northern and southern tribes, but the lack of articles about the southerns tribes might make this difficult. N.Hoxha (talk) 16:11, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * In the long run there should be a similar navigation for all krahinat etnografike. Which can cover Southern tribal regions. --Calthinus (talk) 16:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You're right, but it will be more difficult because they appear even less frequently in historical record than Malësorët. For example, a big tribe of Myzeqe region were the Lali-Lalët, but there's so very little on historical record about them. Rrok Zojzi in 1962 maybe wrote the first study and Jovan Jano (b.1949) was probably the first person from Myzeqe that wrote about them.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Anything and everything concerning Myzeqe is totally undercovered on wiki rn. --Calthinus (talk) 22:55, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

In historiography
The section in historiography wasn't about Albanian tribes but Ghegs - a term that isn't used by most of the Albanian tribes to define themselves), but a position of Serbian academia in the early 20th century about northern Albanians in general. Only one sentence from the whole section was related to the fis. That sentence was taken from Cvijic (1918) was not RS when it was published because it was an ideological text designed to legimitize the expansion of the Serbian state, but it has also been discredited by the archival records that have been found, compiled and translated since then: the cadaster of Scutari (1945 and 1977), the defter of Shkodra (1975) and others. Even at the time it was written it was an extreme play on words because there is no tribe that has a tradition of an Albanian-Serb origin. You'd think that at least *one* tribe could be named in the extensive bibliography we have. There has to be some consistency between general overviews about a topic and the content of that topic.

The only tribe in Albania and Montenegro that claims as a community to have a "mixed" origin is Ceklin in Montenegro and I'm using mixed in brackets here because the people of Ceklin trace their origin matrilineally so paternal ancestry is not that important and also they don't consider it a "mixed" origin that one side was from Kelmendi and the other from Piperi. In general, the Slavic peoples of Montenegro are mostly descendants of the Lužani. Since 1918, archival research has made significant strides forwards. Wikipedia can't remain in the "Dark Ages" of anthropology and speculative nation-building ethnography.--Maleschreiber (talk) 08:01, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

16th century map
There are some changes which I want to propose to the map when you have some free time. Gruda in many ways is Tuzi and I don't think that they should be depicted as separate formations.--Maleschreiber (talk) 15:52, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I am open to suggestions. I have an working draft that I can improve. Regarding Gruda and Tuzi, because both are mentioned in the 15th century, I put them separately. Çerçok (talk) 15:56, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Tuzi is mentioned in the 14th century for the first time and Gruda is basically Tuzi + Suma and some other families. The question is whether Tuzi was part of Gruda or if it was separate at that point - in the late 15th/early 16th century.--Maleschreiber (talk) 21:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

"...while others became slavicised very early on and the majority of the descendants no longer consider themselves Albanian (i.e. Kuči, Mahine etc.)..."

While some Kuçi's slavicised over the years, there are still some left that are still albanian and I am talking about my family, about 200 family members... this sentence is wrong and should be corrected. According to oral tradition, after a blood feud, some family members settled in southern Prishtina and near Prizren. 2A02:1210:4A58:1500:E4F3:7237:51B9:8480 (talk) 20:04, 18 April 2023 (UTC)