Talk:Gjin Bua Shpata

Removals
Since this [] [] [](the entire sentence is visible now) comes from a reliable source, I see no reason removing it. It's a nice piece of info that should be add inside.Alexikoua (talk) 22:14, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The source you are using 1)makes just a hypothesis without even mentioning where it is based 2) Alexandru Madgearu is not reliable because of his known Romanian nationalist books. Moreover he is contradicted by all the other sources. I will revert you and this will be my second revert so stop putting edit-war templates in my talk page, because you are the one who has been warned by admins and blocked for edit-warring not me.--Kushtrim123 (talk) 15:50, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


 * You should read the quote, since it says: ..."but is is sure that at least the Buia family is of Aromanian origin", p. 83 []. We have:


 * No hypothesis, but certainty. Even if it was speculation it needs to be added as a speculation. We have not a reason to hide this option.
 * You need to prove that Madgearu is nationalistic, simply stating your personal opinion in a hostile way as you did before [], proves nothing. I see that Madgearu is used as a source in 33 wiki articles so far as a reliable source [].
 * Apart from respecting sourced contend please avoid wp:npa violations.Alexikoua (talk) 16:13, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Please dont remove referenced material diff, Kushtrim123Megistias (talk) 16:44, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


 * is a typical wp:truth book written by Madgearu. I'm going to revert you now and please stop edit-warring all over wikipedia.--Kushtrim123 (talk) 23:18, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually it's a typical wp:idontlikeit case from you. Please stop removing sourced material by wp:rs as part of your nationalistic agenda claiming racial purity.Alexikoua (talk) 07:28, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Kushtrim123 is almost certainly a sock of the banned Sarandioti. No need to engage him or pay any attention to what he says and does. Athenean (talk) 07:48, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It doesn't look like it (see here) and you better source well what you are claiming. I can't see anything in the reference to support that the Shpatas were from Aromanian descent . --sulmues (talk) 07:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I see now but I don't see where Madgearu finds his sources. --sulmues (talk) 07:43, 22 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Most of you don't really know the academic credibility of Madgearu. For example in the same book he writes that Balsa I was an Albanian king from Montenegro and his family was probably of Vlach origin. He's trying to prove with his own nationalist assumptions that every notable Balkans figure Albanian, Montenegrin etc. is of Vlach origin based on his own nationalist assumptions.--Kushtrim123 (talk) 16:06, 8 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Madgearu is one of the most credible Balkan historians, and especially about Aromanian related topics. If he is certain and explains that this specific family is of Aromanian origin, or at least a branch of it, then I'm sorry your obsession on removing this part is nothin more than obsession, and it's not the first time you removed this part using wp:idontlikeit arguments.Alexikoua (talk) 16:32, 8 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Kushtrim123 and Alexikoua you could always ask for someone else's opinion instead of reverting each-other.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 08:08, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Balsa was not Albanian, at least according to the correspodent article. More authors agree with A. Madgearus works (disputed origins).Villick (talk) 19:27, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * This is an article on the Bue Shpata family, not on Balsa, so I entered a full quotation needed to your reference. In fact I cannot see to whom your reference is referring. Btw the Balsa has nothing to do with the Buas. --  S undefined ulmues (talk) 19:30, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Two comments(in a nutshell):


 * 1) If two or more users disagree then they should RfC


 * 1) Exceptional claims need exceptional sources

-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It seems like Villick was referring to the Balshas. To precise, there is no need for an RfC. The first step to dispute resolution is wp:Third Opinion (that is when two people are disputing something). When three people + are in disagreement, then an RfC is warranted. --  S undefined ulmues (talk) 19:47, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * We have another wp:idontlikeit situation. A typical wp:spa revert only account (Kushtrim) removed a sourced part (with a ridiculous excuse about Balsha being Albanian). And now two other accounts follow him and support him: Similar situation with Napoleon Zervas where a wp:spa (obvious unlogged block evading Guildenrich) initiated the edit war and was followed by the Zjarri-Sulmues team.

Since there is no reason stated for the removal that Zjarri performed (like Kushtrim style did before), this part will be restored. It's obvious that someone that rejects reliable sources needs to give appropriate explanations.

1. There is no exceptional claim, his Albanian originis questioned even by Hammond

2. Although Zjarri got his third part opinion [], he is still disruptive here 'pretending' the neutral part.Alexikoua (talk) 22:16, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Alexi, please stop accusing left and right and bring the full quote to verify claim. The snippet that Villick brought earlier didn't say one thing about the Bua. He is also saying something about Balsas bringing full confusion. --  S undefined ulmues (talk) 22:25, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * He 'obviously' answered to Kushtrim's 'argument'. Since there is not a real argument presented so far for the removal of this sourced part, this should stay.Alexikoua (talk) 22:34, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * What do you mean there is no real argument? I'm asking you or Villick to provide full quote. In the snippet that he provided you can't see Bua or Shpata mentioned anywhere. --  S undefined ulmues (talk) 22:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It seems that the previous snippet was wrong. I've restored the initial quote I'd added once with the full sentence verified (it talks only about Aromanian origin).Alexikoua (talk) 22:55, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * This is also interesting: (about Malakasioi, Bouoi, Messarioi) []. No wonder Hammond confirms this possibility [].Alexikoua (talk) 23:14, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That's Pouqeuville an outdated and not RS source(actually further damaging Magdearu's credibility as a historian)-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 23:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * After checking Hammond's book provides a series of arguments about their Aromanian origin. Zjarri: please do not misinterpret the given bilbiography. Hammond is one of the most credible sources on the topic and he says that they might be Aromanians. 23:26, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That's John Catacuzenus(13th century outdated and unreliable source) and Hammond is just interpreting him.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 23:29, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

(outdent)I don't want to get drawn into a dispute I know nothing about, but this page is in my watchlist and this John Catacuzenus is Emperor John VI Kantakouzenos, whose history is a unique and very valuable primary source, as he writes of things that few other medieval historians cover. He is "outdated and unreliable" only in the sense that Herodotus is the same: yes, we must be skeptical, we must try to verify things from other sources, but in the end, our historical narrative relies on him to a critical degree because of the absence of other evidence. An old secondary source may well be worthless, but a primary source cannot be dismissed out of hand, because that is what historians have for evidence to go on. Constantine  ✍  23:42, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

"It's outdated per WP:RS policy thus can't be used as a source especially when all historians disagree with him.--Kushtrim123 (talk) 23:45, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Rv Kushtrim, because I first want to discuss sources and Hammond qualifies as RS. Magdearu obviously relies on Hammond, but where is Hammond relying? In fact John Cantacuzenus is clearly saying that they were Albanians. However Hammond says that they were Vlachs, but in the snippet we can't see if he is referring to the Buas or to all three tribal leaders. --  S undefined ulmues (talk) 23:49, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Misuse of Hammond as reference
page 59 of the book of Hammond speaks clear of Shpata family origin "In 1358 the Albanians overran Epirus, Acarnania and Aetolia, and established two principalities under their leaders, John Spatas (shpate in Albanian meaning a sword) and Peter Leosas (lios in Albanian meaning a pockmark), Naupactus fell into their control in 1378."

Why Hammond is misused!? Aigest (talk) 00:01, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Madgearu claim
Magearu claim "Albanian historians consider ....."

If we search for Shpata family on non-Albanian authors we can see that French, English, Italian, German, Greek, Spanish, Slav authors, claim that they are Albanian (apart the above mentioned and respected emperor:). Apparently Madgearu didn't read any of them, at least Hammond could have been sufficent for an expert of the field.

Old Authors
 * 1) Voyage dans la Grèce: comprenant la description ancienne et moderne de l'Épire, de l'Illyrie grecque, de la Macédoine Cisaxienne, ... avec des considérations sur l'archéologie, la numismatique, les moeurs, les arts, l'industrie et le commerce des habitants de ces provinces, Volume 5 Author François Charles Hughes Laurent Pouqueville Publisher Firmin Didot, Père et Fils, 1821 here
 * 2) Travels in Greece and Albania, Volume 2 Travels in Greece and Albania, Thomas Smart Hughes Author Thomas Smart Hughes Edition 2 Publisher H. Colburn and R. Bentley, 1830 here
 * 3) The history of modern Greece: from its conquest by the Romans B.C. 146, to the present time, Volume 1 Author Sir James Emerson Tennent Publisher H. Colburn and R. Bentley, 1830 here
 * 4) The princes of Achaia and the Chronicles of Morea: a study of Greece in the middle ages, Volume 2 Author Rennell Rodd Publisher E. Arnold, 1907 Original from Indiana University here

New ones
 * 1) The Latins in the Levant: a history of Frankish Greece (1204-1566) Western books: The Middle East from the rise of Islam Author William Miller Edition reprint Publisher Speculum Historiale, 1964 here
 * 2) Migrations and invasions in Greece and adjacent areasNicholas Geoffrey Lemprière Hammond Noyes Press, 1976 here
 * 3) The Papacy and the Levant, Volume 1 Volume 127 of Memoirs of the American philosophical society The Papacy and the Levant, Kenneth M. Setton Author Kenneth M. Setton Publisher American Philosophical Society, 1978 ISBN 0871691272, 9780871691279 here
 * 4) Juan Fernández de Heredia's Aragonese versión of the Libro de Marco Polo Volume 1 of Dialect series Authors Marco Polo, Juan Fernández de Heredia, Escorial. Real Biblioteca Editor John J. Nitti Edition illustrated Publisher Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies, 1980 here
 * 5) The Serbs and Byzantium during the reign of Tsar Stephen Dušan (1331-1355) and his successors Author George Christos Soulis Edition illustrated Publisher Dumbarton Oaks Library and Collection, 1984 here
 * 6) Albanci Authors Francesco Altimari, Janez Stanič Publisher Cankarjeva založba, 1984 Length 276 pages here
 * 7) Griechenland: Lexikon der historischen Stätten von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart Siegfried Lauffer ISBN 3406333028, 9783406333026 Length 775 pages Beck, 1989 here
 * 8) Byzantinische Zeitschrift, Volume 98, Issue 1 Authors Karl Krumbacher, Paul Marc, August Heisenberg, Walter de Gruyter & Co Publisher C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 2005 here
 * 9) Imagining frontiers, contesting identities Volume 2 of Frontiers and identities: thematic work group 5 Volume 2 of Frontiers and identities Authors Steven G. Ellis, Lud'a Klusáková Editors Steven G. Ellis, Lud'a Klusáková Publisher Edizioni Plus, 2007 ISBN 8884924669, 9788884924667 Length 458 pages here
 * 10) Catalan domination of Athens, 1311-1388 Author Kenneth Meyer Setton Edition revised Publisher Variorum, 1975 here
 * 11) Epirus, 4000 years of Greek history and civilizationM. V. Sakellariou Ekdotikē Athēnōn, 1997 - History - 480 pages here
 * 12) Els catalans a la Mediterrània oriental a l'edat mitjana: jornades científiques de l'Institut d'Estudis Catalans, Secció Històrico-arqueològica : Barcelona, 16 i 17 de novembre de 2000 Volume 11 of Sèrie Jornades científiques Volume 2000 of Els catalans a la Mediterrània oriental a l'edat mitjana, Maria Teresa Ferrer i Mallol Author María Teresa Ferrer i Mallol Publisher Institut d'Estudis Catalans, 2003 ISBN 8472836703, 9788472836709 here
 * 13) The Ottoman Emirate (1300-1389): Halcyon Days in Crete 1 : a symposium held in Rethymnon 11-13 January 1991 Author Elisavet A. Zachariadou Editor Elisavet A. Zachariadou Publisher Crete University Press, 1993 here
 * 14) Europe in the late Middle Ages Author John Rigby Hale Publisher Northwestern University Press, 1971 ISBN 0810101122, 9780810101128 Length 520 pages here
 * 15) The Hospitaller state on Rhodes and its western provinces, 1306-1462 Issue 655 of Collected studies Volume 655 of Variorum Collected Studies Author Anthony Luttrell Edition illustrated Publisher Ashgate, 1999 ISBN 0860787966, 9780860787969 Length 352 pages here
 * 16) Byzantinische Zeitschrift, Volume 76 Editor Karl Krumbacher Publisher C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1983 here

Appart for his absence of mentioning the opinion of the above authors on this matter (how interesting for one of the most credible Balkan historians:) from his sentence it looks like only Albanian historians are pushing an agenda on Shpata family), could you bring the reference Madgearu is using for such claim "for sure they were Aromanian"? I can not see it in the snippet view. Aigest (talk) 00:59, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Bombardment of sources just misleads this discussion
The issue isn't here that they weren't Albanians (so this bibliography is irrelevant with the discussion) but that credible authors Madgearu&Hammond provide an alternative posibility supporting it with a number of arguments.

Hammond states both posibilities: they might be Albanian they might be Aromanian: and gives a series of arguments for both posibilities. I don't understant why the one possibility (Aromanian) should be removed as result of cherry picking and hiding. Alexikoua (talk) 08:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Exceptional claims need exceptional sources. Madgearu uses as source Pouqeuville that was a French consul not a historian so per rs it isn't reliable. Since it's just Madgearu who proposes this it is a fringe theory like Kushtrim123 said.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 08:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Don't misuse Hammond. From what we see from his book he calls him Albanian and even gives an Albanian explanation of his name. For god sake, even Sakellariou who can certainly be considered NOT a pro Albanian, states that. Before complaining about the bombardment of sources, I would recommend Alexi to have once more a look at fringe theories policies here in wiki since there is only one author, Madgearu who states that "Bua are certainly Aromanian," (even though you still did not provide the reference he is using for his claim) while all the authors begining with Byzantine Emperor and up to the latest publications, for more than 600 years maintain the contrary. That's why Madgearu can be considered fringe (just like Kushtrim told you above) and should not be used here. Aigest (talk) 09:56, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

@Aigest: The one that misuses Hammond hiding the Aromanian possibility is unfortunately you. Hammond makes it clear about both the Albanian and Aromanian posibilties. He questions the Albanian origin with this:
 * "Whatever their language, they were described by the Greek and Latin writers as 'Albanoi' or 'Arbanitai' or 'Albanenses', and the reason for this collective term can only be that they entered the Byzantine world through the district which the Byzantines known as Arbanon'"[]
 * "Initially and for a long time all invaders from the north-western area were simply 'Albanoi'."[]
 * "...(Malakasii, Bouii, Mesarite). They were in fact Vlachs"[].

We should state Hammond's, approach in its entirery (he is one of the experts on the field) without hiding any possibility.Alexikoua (talk) 10:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Yoiu are abusing with the snippets. Let me enlight you with the entire passages of Hammond
 * 1) It was in this period that the flow of immigrants from the northwestern area began (see Maps 11-13). It became a flood in the fourteenth century. They went as mercenaries, raiders and migrants. The great majority of them were speakers of Albanian, but others joined the movement. Whatever their language, they were described by the Greek and Latin writers as ‘Albanoi' or ‘Arbanitai' or 'Albanenses', and the reason for this collective term can only be that they entered the Byzantine world through the district which the Byzantines knew as 'Albanon'. Thus the Vlach-speaking Malakasii, who invaded Thessaly in 1334 were described as 'Albanoi' by Cantacuzenus 1.474 no less than the evidently Albanian speaking 'Albanensium gens' which raided Thessaly in 1325 (18) . Initially and for a long time all invaders from the north-western area were simply 'Albanoi'. It was only gradually that distinctions of language were regarded as significant and the concept of an Albanian race in a wider sense developed.


 * 1) "In 1358 the Albanians overran Epirus, Acarnania and Aetolia, and established two principalities under their leaders, John Spatas (shpate in Albanian meaning a sword) and Peter Leosas (lios in Albanian meaning a pockmark), Naupactus fell into their control in 1378. The cities which held out against them, especially loannina and Arta, were ravaged by a series of plagues, and Thomas, the Serbian Despot of loannina, saved himself at first by making marriage alliances with the two Albanian leaders. In the Greek account of the Albanian advance under Peter Leosas we learn that he was accompanied by "Mazarakii and Malakasei of his own race" (Epeirotica 2.220; cf. 222 f.), (21) While Mazaraki is in central Epirus by the river Kalamas, Malakasa is the coastal plain of central Albania farther north and the words ‘of his own race' were used to distinguish the Albanian-speaking Malakasaei from the Vlach-speaking Malakasii. They were accompanied by Bulgars and Vlachs. It is clear that Thomas feared the Albanians above all. Whereas he mutilated the Bulgars and the Vlachs, he allowed most of his Albanian prisoners to be ransomed. Atrocities were committed no doubt by both sides, and Thomas came to be called Albanitoktonos (Albanian-killer; Epeirotica 2.225). In 1380 Thomas brought in the Turks as allies and passed to the offensive, but he did not advance farther than the basin of the upper Kalamas, where he took Vela (by Vrondismeni), Boursina (Vrousina), and Kretzounista (Dhespotikon) (21). The Albanians and in particular the Mazarakii of the Kalamas valley held firm against him. In 1385 he was assassinated by some of his own bodyguards (Epeirotica 2.230)."
 * 2) In the eyes of the Greeks/ the Albanians and those associated with them were fine hunters, (31) excellent horsemen and redoubtable warriors. As has been said by Joseph Campbell, "by and large hunting people are warrior people; and not only that, but many are exhilarated by battle and turn warfare into exercises in bravura"(32). These were the ancestors of the Souliote warriors, whom Byron admired so much in the Greek War of Independence. In the fourteenth century they were feared and hated in northern Greece, but they were hired as mercenaries or attracted as settlers by the rulers of the principalities in the Peloponnese and central Greece and Thessaly. The most warlike of the Albanians were those described by the Greeks as living in great mountainous areas, that is those engaged in pastoralism with the transhumance of sheep. They were certainly illiterate, but they were tightly organised in tribal units with a patriarchal system of leadership. When Manuel Cantacuzenus took over Albania, he expelled “all the men of account" ("tutti li homini di conto"); and John Ducas reported the killing of all the eminent Albanians when the Greeks attempted to gain control of the Albanian settlers in the Peloponnese (33). The leaders were evidently very capable men, possessing wide powers over their followers, and 'John the Sword', 'Peter the Pockmark' and 'Peter the Lame' led very large armies of Albanian warriors with success. When they were hired as mercenaries, they came not as individuals but as organised bands, sometimes accompanied by their families and animals. The hope of their employers was that the Albanians would "come with their horses" and fulfil their obligations "to maintain their horses, garrison the forts and obey orders (34)". It was these cavalrymen, with their entourage, who were the leaders. The rank and file fought on foot.

From what we see there were Malakassi who spoke Albanian and Malakassi who spoke Vlach and this can be an interesting article in wiki, but as far as the question of Gjin Bue Shpata and Pjeter Losha, Hammond is very clear in his statements. It is a classical example of snippet abuse. It is better for you guys to stop with snippet abuse, either read the entire book or search for other references. Aigest (talk) 10:44, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * To me it's clear that Hammond considers as Albanians both Pjeter Losha and Gjin Bue Shpata and Hammond is a reliable source. Magdearu, instead, would qualify as wp:fringe, because he is just relying on the words of Pouqueville, without doing a full research on all the sources available. Aigest could you please enrich the article with some more references from Hammond? Right now we are not using him as a source. Actually Hammond when makes the separation between Malakasa and Vlach Malakasii uses -ii for the Vlach-speaking tribe and regarding the Bua and Buii he doesn the same scholars' trick to separate them. --  S undefined ulmues (talk) 10:52, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Cherry picking concert in order to present a pure Albanian version

 * Aigest: the one that reject the one of the two posibilities is you. Hammond (the 'selected' passages you provided were obviously copy-pasted from a ultranationalistic forum([] that obviously takes in account only the Albanian origin) presents BOTH theories and this should be presented in its entirety. Since you have not presented a reason why we should present only the pure Albanian version (apart from the obvious reasons), Hammond's and Madgearu's opinions should be presented:


 * "Whatever their language, they were described by the Greek and Latin writers as 'Albanoi' or 'Arbanitai' or 'Albanenses', and the reason for this collective term can only be that they entered the Byzantine world through the district which the Byzantines known as Arbanon'"[]
 * "Initially and for a long time all invaders from the north-western area were simply 'Albanoi'."[]
 * "They submitted because they were afraid of being attacked during the time of heavy snows. According to John Cantacuzenus 1.474, they were "Albanians with no king, called after their tribal chiefs (phylarch) Malakasii, Bouii, Mesarite. They were in fact Vlachs"[].

Moreover I see that the Malakassi&Mesarite were several times presented as Vlach speaking by Hammond.

Aigest, please before you make any additional revert read Hammond's book in its entirety, because it provides valid arguments for both versions. Also Madgearu seems to be a credible and widely used source in wikipedia, so you need to state a reason why he is wp:frindge too. (Bombrding with irrelevant data the discussion just weakens the arguments).Alexikoua (talk) 11:38, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Al. Madgearu [] seems to be a very credible author. However I'm ok with Hammond's approach (and I mean the entire work, not just the selected passages provided by 'forum i lire')Alexikoua (talk) 11:54, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Alexi you are continuing snippet abuse, because you are not bringing the whole story. There are large paragraphs to the Albanian descent of Gjin Bue Shpata. That phrase of Hammond is not substantiated because it seems like none of us has the book. You have three editors disagreeing with you, at this point, you should bring an RfC rather than edit warring and bringing the same snippet over and over. --  S undefined ulmues (talk) 12:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately I have complete access on this work (it's a well known one). To sum up 2 mainstream works mention an alternative theory. Hammond (one of them) presents (apart from the Albanian theory) an alternative theory Aromanian theory with several arguments (linguistic, anachronism of the term 'Albanians' etc.).

If you believe that the work of Hammond, which is of high credibility should only be partly presented (like presenting only the copy pasted passages by an ultranationalistic forum), then I'm sorry it's not me the one that should wp:rfc. By the way I would appreciate if we avoid blind removals while the discussion is still active and provide arguments against it (not wp:oring, like X is not reliable because I just don't like what he says).Alexikoua (talk) 14:22, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Aigest copied/pasted the whole quote and it is too different than the snippet you are using. Btw per BRD after the first revert you should have stopped edit-warring. So your only source is Magdearu and Aigest brought so many reliable references that Magdearu based on Pouqeuville under these circumstances proposes a fringe theory.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 14:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem, I can provide all the book. For the record why you say that Madgearu is based on Pouqeville? Have you access on the reference he is based on? Suppose not.Alexikoua (talk) 14:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Aigest already provided it and it's the opposite of what you're claiming. Hammond just quotes Kantakouzenos, unless he's contradicting himself something not possible. Mmagdearu based on Pouqeuville: -- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 14:51, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but, neither Hammond quotes Kantakouzenos (Kantakouzenos says that they were Albanians, Hammond disagrees with him and says that they were in fact Vlachs []) nor Madgearu uses as ref Puqueville (he 'propably uses [] ref 99,' among them there is also Hammond included []).

This Aromanian link is supported by an entire bibliography: Hammond, Winnifrith, Koukidis (actually all the specialist on the topic) []: with very detailed descriptions about their movements together with other Vlach and Albanian tribes. Thank you. Alexikoua (talk) 15:17, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * An entire bibliography supports the exact opposite. Koukoudes is fairly unknown, unreliable and makes too many date mistake in his books. Btw the Bua family never settled in southern Thessaly so that's a similar case to the Malakasa, where two different tribes with the same name existed. -- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 15:24, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * We have an alternative theory adopted by several experts on the topic (Hammond, Winnifrith, Koukidis, Madgearu). As an alternative should be stated.Alexikoua (talk) 15:29, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Please bring full quotation of Hammond and also Winnifrith then. --  S undefined ulmues (talk) 15:31, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * @Zjarri: The Bouas came to Epirus from Thessaly, not directly from Albania: this is clearly stated by all authors, even by them that say that they were of Albanian origin: [](Boua clan is attested in Thessaly in 1334.Alexikoua (talk) 15:33, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Alexikoua is again misusing the sources because that source states that: Another interesting case is the fate of the Boua clan, which is well known and probably representative of the Albanian migrations.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 15:40, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Madrugearu is a reliable source, and he states unambiguously that the Buas were of Aromanian origin. As long as it is properly hedged, e.g. "According to Alexander Madrugearu....", I don't see what's so controversial about this. Athenean (talk) 18:13, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll begin with T. Winnifrith []: (p. 120-121, it's the entire paragraph)

''According to John Kantakouzenos some people who lived in no town but inaccessible places in the mountains of Thessaly submitted in 1334 to the Emperor Andronicus III. They were Albanians with no king, called after their tribal chiefs, Malakasii, Bouii and Mesaritae. But these were probably Vlachs; there were in Pouque-ville's time Vlachs in the Pindus who called themselves Bovi, and there is still a village called Malakasi. Elsewhere we hear of the Albanian leader Peter Liosas leading Malakasii of his own race, and this would seem to suggest two kinds of Malakasii. The name may derive from the coastal plain of Mallakastir, a word of Latin origin, in central Albania. The theory that the Bouii came from the nearby highland pastures of the Bevaei is more conjectural. Together with the Albanians the Vlach spenetrated to central and Southern Greece. We hear of Vlachs in Attica, Kephallenia and Crete, although in these instances and in the placenames with a Vlach element which can be found as far south as the southern Peloponnese there may be confusion between Vlachs and shepherds or Albanians.''Alexikoua (talk) 18:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Assumptions can't be added as facts, especially when they contradict the majority of sources and are proposed as part of a fringe theory without sources. It also seems that like Madgearu Winnifrith is based on Pouqeuville another outdated source.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 18:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * An insane argument. All historians rely on older sources.  If we started with "Historian X is not reliable because he relies on the older historian Y", then we would have to reject ALL historians.  All that matters is whether a particular historian can be considered a reliable sources.  Madrugearu and Winnifrith meet the guidelines of WP:RS, so it ends there.  It is not for us to judge their sources.  IF some people are upset by Madrugearu and Winnifrith, they can go to WP:RSN, but I think they would just be wasting their time and nothing more.  Athenean (talk) 18:35, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Since all this mainstream and credible authors make these descriptions, rejecting this sequence of events is far too much. I would suggest you wp:rfc, but this possibility should be noted as an alternative one.18:31, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Guys you are forgetting that Conclusion, "according to Hammond he and also his followers, were Albanians" just simple as that. Any other attempt on Hammond position on "John the Sword" is a pure speculation.
 * 1) This article is on a person
 * 2) His name was Gjin (Alb)=John (eng)
 * 3) His surname was Shpata (Alb)=Sword (Eng)
 * 4) Hammond clearly defines him Albanian (together with Peter Losha)(Hammond, page 59)
 * 5) Hammond does not speak of "John the Sword" origin, but clearly defines him as Albanian together with his followers "John Ducas reported the killing of all the eminent Albanians when the Greeks attempted to gain control of the Albanian settlers in the Peloponnese (33). The leaders were evidently very capable men, possessing wide powers over their followers, and 'John the Sword', 'Peter the Pockmark' and 'Peter the Lame' led very large armies of Albanian warriors with success." (Hammond, page 62)

Moreover as an observation, in the sources IMO again Hammond is wrightAigest (talk) 22:24, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) The name of the person is Gjin or Ghin, (Alb. form) while he never is presented as Ghinu (Rom. form)
 * 2) The middle name used in sources is Bua or Boua (eg.Bua Spata or Boua Spata, Alb. form means Ox) while Boui or Bouii forms (Rom. forms) are never used as his middle name.
 * 3) The last name is presented always as Spata or Spatas (Alb. form)
 * 4) Sometimes he is called simply Ghin Spata


 * We are discussing about the section 'Shpata family'. If you feel that this section is irrelevant we can completely remove it or move it to a new article.Alexikoua (talk) 22:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I thought we were talking about Gjin Shpata Aigest (talk) 22:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Hammond's generalized comments about both theories: []

''For the evidence that they were Vlachs, see E. Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (ed. Bury), 6, p. 391, n. 25. 9. So Weigand (A), p. 276; Wace and Thompson, p. 264 and others. It was argued that G. C. Soulis in Epeteris Byzantinon Spoudon 23 (1953) 213 that Malakasii, etc. were Albanians and not Vlachs, but the fact that the modern Malakasii and Bouii are Vlachs is surely decisive.''

Hope Hammond is clear enough on this (he doesn't reject the Aromanian theory).

@Aigest: it's not about the specific person but about if we should mention in the 'shpata/boua family' section the possibility of Aromanian origin. Gjin Boua Shpata as an individual is known as Albanian in every book.Alexikoua (talk) 22:33, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Possibilities expressed by a too small minority based on Pouqeuville(outdated) or on personal deductions are fringe theories. Winnifrith suggests that the Bouii may have been originally Aromanian because according to him when Pouqeville travelled in some villages allegedly founded by them he found Aromanian-speaking people there. As a parallelism proving the irrationality of this argument someone could suggest that because most people that lived in New York in the 1820s spoke English, 500 years ago it was founded by English people.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 12:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Hammond, Winnifrith, and Madrugearu are not "too small minority" or "fringe" or any such nonsense. They are perfectly good sources.  It is not for us to judge their methods.  Some historians rely on Herodotus.  Does that mean we should discard them because Herodotus is "outdated".  All historians rely on older historians, if we had to discard all historians who did so, we would have to discard all of them.  Enough with the ethnic purity hysteria.  Athenean (talk) 23:14, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hammond states the opposite while Magdearu based on Pouqeuville who is outdated and not even a historian discards the majority of bibliography as Albanian historians. Winnifrith doesn't even support that thesis but states that according to Pouqeuville who allegedly found some Vlach-speaking villages in the 1820s founded allegedly by the Bua family the Bua may have been Vlach-speaking.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 00:02, 18 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Herodotus is outdated too, but that doesn't mean we discard any historian who uses him as a source. Athenean (talk) 01:46, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Commenting only on this one aspect of the silliness that is this discussion: a Pouqueville–Herodotus analogy is patent nonsense. Herodotus is a privileged primary source for many things of his time, because he is the only source we have, and he was (in his way) a responsible historian. Pouqueville was an 18th century guy who wasn't an historian, and simply had no way of knowing anything about 14th-century figures in the Balkans. If Magdearu indeed relies on anything from him, that would be highly dubious (but, given the quality of this discussion so far, I doubt even this much). Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:22, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes Magdearu relies exclusively on Pouqeuville .-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 11:28, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * In fact, I won't take your word for it, on the basis of merely that snippet. I find it hard to believe that a researcher should do something as naive as that. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:38, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Not all researchers are reliable and this snippet is used as a source that the Bua may have been Vlach-speaking, so there is nothing rs to support this statement. Btw this book was originally published in Romanian in 2001 and was translated in 2008 with the assistance of Martin Gordon-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 12:09, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You have only cited that same snippet again. Can you or can't you vouch for it that Magdearu really has only Pouqueville to rely on, or does he have other arguments too? Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:08, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The only other related paragraph uses footnote 99 as a source for an alleged misidentification of Albanians/Aromanians. In that footnote the source is Winnifrith, Ioan D. Caragiani and Hammond, although they aren't used to cite the Buia alleged origin. There isn't another footnote/source related to it so Pouqeuville is the only source Magdearu uses.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 15:00, 18 July 2010 (UTC)


 * To sum up: Winnifrith and Hammond (both top experts on the topic) say that this is very likely, and as such it should be mentioned. Alexikoua (talk) 15:06, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Aigest provided the whole quotes not just snippets on which you relied and Winnifrith states that this is a suggestion of Pouqeuville.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 15:30, 18 July 2010 (UTC)


 * And then I provided the entire passages of both Winnifrith and Hammond (not just snippets as you mysteriously claim). By the way Winnifrith is not based on Puqeuville at all.Alexikoua (talk) 16:41, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

(unindent)Winnifrith too like Magdearu relies exclusively on Pouqeuville as he himself states:


 * But these were probably Vlachs; there were in Pouque-ville's time Vlachs in the Pindus who called themselves Bovi, and there is still a village called Malakasi.

-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 17:05, 18 July 2010 (UTC)


 * He uses Pouqueville in a series of arguments, quite obvious. The main point is that since multiple top graded authors say that 'these were probably Vlachs' we have to mention this exactly on the article.Alexikoua (talk) 18:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * There is no series of arguments but just Pouqeuville and Hammond doesn't state that while Magdearu like Winnifrith uses Pouqeuville. So like FutureP has alread said Pouqeuville is far from being reliable(he wasn't even a historian).-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:43, 18 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Since this discussion has became too big I repeat Hammond's comments:

''For the evidence that they were Vlachs, see E. Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (ed. Bury), 6, p. 391, n. 25. 9. So Weigand (A), p. 276; Wace and Thompson, p. 264 and others. It was argued that G. C. Soulis in Epeteris Byzantinon Spoudon 23 (1953) 213 that Malakasii, etc. were Albanians and not Vlachs, but the fact that the modern Malakasii and Bouii are Vlachs is surely decisive.''Alexikoua (talk) 19:51, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Then I will remove the sentence as this isn't related at all to the Bua family of the Middle Ages but people living in Greece that became gradually Aromanians in modern times.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 20:13, 18 July 2010 (UTC)


 * For the record the Bua members were the leaders of the Bouii (it's in plural) tribe. The tribe was named after their leader, they came from modern Albania, moved to Thessaly at 1330s and then invaded Epirus.Alexikoua (talk) 10:20, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Alexikoua it's obvious that before Thessaly they went to Epirus and I don't see how that is connected to the dicussion. If you have no arguments about the medieval Buas(and not Latinized modern people) the sentence as undue weight will be removed.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 15:18, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

@Alex, you (Madgearu also:)) are confusing 19 century evidence with that of 14 century. This article is not about modern Malakasii or modern Buii (whatever that surname could mean). For example Hammond itself has explained very clearly that there were Aromanian speaking Malakasii and Albanian speaking Malakasii (those of Peter Losha, who by the way it was the tribal leader of Malakasii but was not called Malakasii itself contradicting Madgearu claim). So the existence of modern (19century) romanian speaking Malakasii could not be connected to Peter Losha, just because they are clearly two different entities. But following Madgearu theory that could not be the case, Peter Losha should be Aromanian. Also we have no evidence connecting the Albanian (as yourself approved above in your comment) Gjin Bua Shpata of 14th century with Aromanian speaking people called Buii of 19century. Even if they are connected we can say that in 19century people supposedly connected to him were reported to spoke Romanian. Following Madgearu theory the family origins are Romanian, but they were Albanised when they appear in history (name, middle name, surname of Gjin Bua Shpata are pure Albanian, not Romanian, just like Hammond explains and virtually all historians call him Albanian) and they were Romanised again later and that is because some people supposedly related to him spoke Romanian in 19th century?! That doesn't make much sense. The simplest explanation could have been that they were Albanian (all contemporary and later sources maintain that) which became romanised later (Pouqeville testimony if it can be accepted). Let me give another simple example following Madgearu theory, it is like proving the Albanians and Illyrians are the same people based only in the fact that some people called Albani near Kruja spoke Albanian in 11 century, so for sure Illyrian tribe Albani was an Albanian tribe. Interestingly Madgearu does not use this kind of argument anymore in his book (section origin of Aalbanians), on the contrary he vehemently opposes it. Aigest (talk) 21:03, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

@Aigest: Please read the sources. The Bouii, who were probably Vlachs, were attested at 1330s in Thessaly (this means they were a medieval tribe). And of course they were connected with their leader who was called Boua. I still don't understand why you confuse 19th century in here: 1330s is considered medieval age. About the Malakasii you are right, but this is irrelevant with the Bouii since they were a single tribe.

I still dont understand since we have an entire bibliography claiming this, why you can't understand the possible Aromanian origin of this clan (especially when Hammond&Winnifrith find this possible).Alexikoua (talk) 21:16, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The only source we have is Magdearu based on Pouqeuville. This discussion can't continue on speculations so if Alexikoua does want to include that then he will have to start a RfC but it will be removed from the article since Alexikoua added it through edit-warring and not consensus. If the RfC is in favor of Alexikoua's edits he should restore them. I will proceed according to the policy unless someone has an objection based on the policy.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:35, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't do that if I were you. You are blatantly misconstruing policy.  If you want to ask for an RfC, go ahead, but that doesn't give you the right to remove the additions.  What you are proposing to do shows bad faith, because you aren't willing to wait for the results of the RfC.  If you remove the edits before the conclusion of the RfC, I will report you to AE (for that and also for your habit of hiding your reverts under the guise of BRD), and you can quote me on that.  Athenean (talk) 21:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * For the record: this part existed until it was removed by Kustrim, a typical disruption only account (a quick look on his contribution makes this very clear).Alexikoua (talk) 21:43, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * From the history I can see that you added it and Kushtrim removed and then both of you edit-warred removing/restoring it. Your edit was not a result of consensus and since the first revert you should have stopped(and Kushtrim too) but you didn't and because of that there are 48k of text with arguments pro and against the edit. If if this doesn't end with a decision then probably and edit-war will begin again by certain users and another 48k will be repeated. So, Alexikoua I'm proposing this: remove the sentence for now, start the RfC and depending on its result we can either restore it or not.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I suggest you take into account, at least, Fut's comments instead.Alexikoua (talk) 22:01, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * FutureP stated that it could be dubious or not. I think my proposal is fair enough to all so do you agree with it?-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 22:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Absolutely not. It doesn't really matter how the article got into the current state, it is locked, and I don't think reverting is a good idea.  Besides, since you are so confident about being in the right, why are you in such a rush to remove the text that offends you even before the RfC?  Athenean (talk) 22:19, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

@Alex. Maybe you did not understand what I was talking about. Based on historical sources, Summarizing sources of 14 century describe Boua clan as Albanian together with its leader(whole historians maintain that Gjin Bua Shpata was an Albanian) moreover his name is a typical Albanian name. That could mean only one thing, that in 14 century Bua clan spoke Albanian according to contemporary sources. If they were later Romanised that is another thing and Puoqeville (a very later source of 19th century) conjecture could say that, not the other way round just as I explained above. Aigest (talk) 06:50, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) when Bua clan was attested in 1330 they were described as Albanians,
 * 2) The leader of the clan, Gjin Shpata is an Albanian name according to Hammond and Hammond clearly defines Gjin Bua Shpata an Albanian
 * 3) and you Alex yourself admit that "Gjin Boua Shpata as an individual is known as Albanian in every book.Alexikoua (talk) 22:33, 16 July 2010 (UTC)".


 * Recycling the same wrong arguments is really weird:


 * 1) Hammond believes the following about the Boua tribe (which was attested on the medieval age by the way): []
 * 2) If the name Gjin Boua Shpata (actually only the 'Shpata') is Albanian this is irrelevant with the origins of the tribe.
 * 3) We are talking about a specific sentence in 'Shpata/Boua family' that is supported by a mountain of mainstream bibliography.
 * 4) Since this bibliography believes that this fact is decisice we should mention this exactly. We have no reason to hide this in order to present a pure Albanian version.

Moreove, as per Madgearu, we can mention that Albanian authors believe that their were for sure Albanians.Alexikoua (talk) 07:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

@Alex. Let's take things more slowly. Per Hammond we can say that Gjin Shpata was an Albanian and leader of Albanians. Not once, but twice Hammond has expressed this exact opinion in a very clear way On a related opinion I would remind you that you have already admitted that "Gjin Boua Shpata as an individual is known as Albanian in every book.Alexikoua (talk) 22:33, 16 July 2010 (UTC)". Is that true or not? Aigest (talk) 08:44, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) In 1358 the Albanians overran Epirus, Acarnania and Aetolia, and established two principalities under their leaders, John Spatas (shpate in Albanian meaning a sword) and and Peter Leosas (lios in Albanian meaning a pockmark)
 * 2) ... and 'John the Sword', Peter the Pockmark' led very large armies of Albanian warriors with success


 * Seems you are still out of topic (insisting on irrelevant quotes/misleading questions about a specific person and ignoring the main subject which is the Boua/Shpata family). If you look at the right passages I've provided the relevant passages from Hammond -Winnifrith (as I see this is stated in 2 additional works of Hammond, +Madgearu & A. Koukoudis), you will see that they all mention the Vlach possibility, something we have to mention too.Alexikoua (talk) 11:30, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Alexikoua:


 * 1) Winnifrith suggests that Pouqeuville found Vlachs in villages allegedly founded by the Bua


 * 1) Magdearu is exclusively based on Pouqeuville and dismisses all the other sources as Albanian historians while as Aigest proved the majority are against this theory.


 * 1) Aigest already brought the full quotes of Hammond and the statement is opposite to your deduction.

If the people living in those villages in the 19th century spoke Aromanian is irrelevant to the subject.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 11:46, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I suggest to wp:rfc instead of mysteriously misinterpreting all these arguments.Alexikoua (talk) 12:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * There will be an RfC but before that the statement will be removed from the article because you added it by edit-warring and to include it you'll have to gain consensus. That's the process per the policy so as soon as you're ready I'll proceed.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 12:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Nope this was there at least 5-6 months [] [](from December till May) until Kushtrim showed up and removed it, the article was also semied due to highly disruptive nationalistic activity (seems disruptive account/ips don't like this part). Alexikoua (talk) 12:29, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

@Alex. Do you think that the fact that the most known figure of Bua clan (Gjin Bua Shpata) is classified as Albanian (and also leader of Albanians) by practically every author is irrelevant to the subject?! You still didn't answer (although in fact you have done before) to my question. Breaking it down. Was Gjin Bua Shpata an Albanian? Did he lead Albanians in Greece? Did the invasion happened in 1358? Another observation. ''...According to John Kantakouzenos some people who lived in no town but inaccessible places in the mountains of Thessaly submitted in 1334 to the Emperor Andronicus III. They were Albanians with no king, called after their tribal chiefs, Malakasii, Bouii and Mesaritae." They were in fact Vlachs...'' but in the mean time Gjin Bua Shpatas' grandfather Nicolo, was a protovestarios of Stefan Dushan King of Serbia, while his father Pietro, was Lord of Angelokastron and Delvino a post that Gjin Bua Shpata himself inherited from him. Aigest (talk) 12:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * And a week ago you started edit-warring to add it back, so you'll have to go through RfC if you want that sentence to be included.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 12:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * @Aegist: You are asking my personal opinion, well this is most likely (also almost all Greek authors agree that he was Albanian), but Hammond, Winnifrith, Madgearu, Koukoudis, have a slightly different opinion. Why should be hide this possibility as an alternative since they mention this? (I've added the last part of the quote you gave above "They were in fact Vlachs...").Alexikoua (talk) 12:41, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Winnifrith states that it's a suggestion of Pouqeuville like Madgearu who dismisses everyone else, Hammond states he was Albanian and makes a distinction between Albanian and Vlach Bua while Koukoudis has too few academic(and reviewed) to be considered rs(also he seems to be copying someone else's work). So in order to resolve this Alexikoua are you ready for removal and RfC?-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 12:50, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems all of your arguments are wrong (apart from the wp:npa vios against me about edit-warring&defending a number of disruptive ip/accounts that disliked this part too): please respect at least Fut's comments and avoid recycling the same aggressive one-sided approach.Alexikoua (talk) 13:08, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Alexi you are repeating the same things even though you were answered and becoming disruptive and at this point I read your arguments only as wp:didn't hear. You are also throwing accusations that don't get along with your good contributions to Wikipedia. I invite you to read well before answering. Hammond clearly says that Gjin Bue Shpata was Albanian. This should suffice. Period. Read wp:fringe and apply it. --  S undefined ulmues (talk) 13:44, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

@Alex, could you stop misciting Hammond for Gjin Bua Shpata. Just answer those questions on Gjin Bua Shpata, will you? After that, it is better for you to find a source who says exactly that "Gjin Bua Shpata origin was Aromanian". Otherwise you are totally OR, mixing sources from different authors in different dates. Aigest (talk) 13:52, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

@Sulmues: can you please explain what you mean with this? [] you happened to stop the rfc process claiming that I'm reasonable (suppose you changed mind now). @Aigest: Hammond is clear about the origins of the Bouii clan, I remind you that this section is called Shpata family and according to Hammond their origin might be Aromanian and as such it should be stated (''For the evidence that they were Vlachs, see E. Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (ed. Bury), 6, p. 391, n. 25. 9. So Weigand (A), p. 276; Wace and Thompson, p. 264 and others. It was argued that G. C. Soulis in Epeteris Byzantinon Spoudon 23 (1953) 213 that Malakasii, etc. were Albanians and not Vlachs, 'but the fact that the modern Malakasii and Bouii are Vlachs is surely decisive.).

For the record the Bouas were the leaders of this clan. Since the Shpata family section deals with all them family member then all of them might be of Aromanian origin.Alexikoua (talk) 18:44, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That's your unrelated to the source deduction. What the modern Buas are is unrelated to this article so per undue weight it has to be removed.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 18:55, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * According to Hammond this is used as one of the arguments to that support this possibility. We are not the ones to judge him (please avoid wp:or). (the same clan was also possibly Vlach in the 1330s []) Alexikoua (talk) 19:00, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That's called snippet abuse and in the quoted text he makes statements about the modern Buas.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:22, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * (?) It's from the passage that Aigest gave entirely and it's about 1330s.Alexikoua (talk) 19:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

(unindent)Aigest brought the quote but you made OR deductions because in the full quote he doesn't state that as fact or even as a confirmed theory.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)-- — ZjarriRrethues —  talk 19:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Aigest's full passage: According to John Kantakouzenos some people who lived in no town but inaccessible places in the mountains of Thessaly submitted in 1334 to the Emperor Andronicus III. "They were Albanians with no king, called after their tribal chiefs, Malakasii, Bouii and Mesaritae." They were in fact Vlachs... (Cantakuzenus says they were Albanians, the author however disagrees). Hope it's easy to understand that.Alexikoua (talk) 19:45, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * @Alex. Seems that you are confusing Albanian Shpata clan explained here and here and Albanian Boua clan explained here and here with Buii of 19 century. Don't go OR here, the existence of Albanian speaking Malakasii apart from Aromanian speaking Malakasii as explained by Hammond, should be enough for you not to draw personal conclusions from that sentence you keep using. Aigest (talk) 07:36, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * @Aigest: Please stop cherry picking Hammond and recycling the same wrong argument: that there were two diferrent Malakasii is completely irrelevant with the Bouii (suppose you need to find something that says this about them). For the record the Bouii were also attested in 13th century (their leaders were named Boua they moved from modern Albania to Thessaly and then to Epirus). I would appreciate if you avoid citing Jaques, an ultranationalist.Alexikoua (talk) 08:32, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * @Alex: In case you didn't understood I will explain it again, this time more slowly.


 * 1) First, leave aside Shpata family hereand here, none of your sources maintain that Shpata family origin was Aromanian. On the contrary all the scholars maintain that Shpata family was an Albanian one.
 * 2) You take a sentence "According to John Kantakouzenos some people who lived in no town but inaccessible places in the mountains of Thessaly submitted in 1334 to the Emperor Andronicus III. They were Albanians with no king, called after their tribal chiefs, Malakasii, Bouii and Mesaritae. But these were probably Vlachs;" and from that, you jump to the conclusion that Gjin Bua Shpata origin was Aromanian. According to the logic you used here we can say that even Peter Leosa leader of the Malakasii should have Aromanian origin. Too bad for you that Hammond has already explained that there were also Albanian speaking clan called Malakasii and Peter Leosa was an Albanian and their leader. That is for reminding you (and the others reading here) that is very dangerous practice giving personal interpretations of scholar sentences, because you might get dead wrong. That's why WP:OR policy exists in wiki.
 * 3) What you (and Madgearu which is maybe not so much immune to nationalistic virus:) miss in this interpretation, is a link between Gjin Bua Shpata family of 14th century and Vlach speaking Buii of 19 century. Hammond does not make that link, in the same book some pages before according to Hammond Gjin Bua Shpata is classified as Albanian here, and here, not once but twice. That could only mean that the family of Gjin Bua Shpata spoke Albanian in 1358, in the same period of time when your supposed "Buii vlachs" are first mentioned by John Kantakouzenos in Thessaly (1334 submition to Emperor Andronicus III). If someone like you could make the link (19th century Vlach Buii= 14th century Vlach Buii=Bua clan), either Gjin Bua Shpata came outside the family as an Albanian usurpator, or he the leader of the clan was Albanaised within a generation.
 * 4) According to scholars Gjin Bua Shpata was from Delvina, while his father was lord of Gjirokaster and Delvina and Delvina is very far away from Thessaly and the position as Lord of Gjirokaster and Delvina is very far away from descrition of no-king-clan of Buii in Thessaly. Aigest (talk) 11:29, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually it states probably Vlachs and and the whole quote ends with there may be confusion between Vlachs and shepherds or Albanians, so even if he stated is a fact there would be a 1 vs. 20 sources disagreement which labels the hypothesis as fringe. Are you ready to proceed with the removal and the RfC?-- — ZjarriRrethues —' talk 19:53, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Off course Hammond isn't fringe (the same Winnifrith and other 3 credible authors). This part should stay unless you prove that these authors are supporting fringe theories. For future reference you should avoid 'self-invented' (against any rule) dilemmas. Since you don't like to go to rfc, and receive negative comments, this should stay.Alexikoua (talk) 20:14, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Alexikoua, please open the RfC if you like, nobody is preventing you from doing that. In addition, can you please start answering Zjarri's comment before giving a hasty answer? I think you are disrupting the process of a talk page and I am warning you that if this repeats I will report you. --  S undefined  ulmues (talk) 21:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Full-protected 3 days
I have full-protected the article for 3 days following yet another Albania-related edit war. Folks, when you discuss something that is contested on the talk page, DO NOT TOUCH THE ARTICLE OR CONTINUE TO REVERT-WAR EACH OTHER!! If I see one more edit war in which users refuse to back away from the article itself while discussing, I will block ALL USERS involved; I will not care who is in the right. It is getting very disruptive, and this is going to stop now. –MuZemike 19:43, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Another interesting material to be used for BUA-SHPATA family or clan
In the early 1360s, Epirus indeed was divided between Albanian clans: the clan of Peter Liosha held Arta, 'the clan of Muriki Boua Spata held Etoloacarnania, with Angelokastron as capital, and their leaders held the Byzantine titles of Despots from Symeon.....Another interesting case is the fate of the Boua clan, which is well known and probably representative of the Albanian migrations. Attested in Thessaly in 1334, they ruled Etoloacarnania and the region of Arta from the 1360s until 1416. They are then attested in 1423 in the Venetian territories of the Peloponnesus85. The Venetians installed them in 1473 in Zakynthos, and after the conquest of that island by the Turks in 1479 they settled in Italy'''....14th-century Albanian immigration was far more important than the Serbian or Italian ones. Indeed, we know that the '''Boua clan present in the Peloponnese in 1423 numbered about one or two thousand people. Unfortunately, it is impossible to know how many clansmen left Epirus for the Peloponnese and how many remained.''' It is also impossible to know how large the other clans were; but we may be sure that several thousand Albanians were installed in Epirus before the Turkish period. Their presence was massive, as our sources say, and their assimilation was problematic, as is shown both by the survival down the centuries of the Albanian language and by the descriptions and accounts given by our sources. The latter, indeed, largely describe the cultural gap between the two populations. Albanian social organization was still archaic, based on the katund, an aggregate of 50-100 families. The clan was then formed by several katund, four in the case of the Boua in 1423 in the Peloponnesus.They were semi-nomads, shepherds and soldiers, that is raiders, whereas the Greeks were sedentary, and had a political and economical system based on the city. They did not share the Greek language, and thus the prestigious Byzantine cultural heritage. This dichotomy between Greeks and Albanians is very apparent in sources such as the Anonymous Panegyric of Emperors Manuel and John VIII Paleologos, which clearly describes the cities of Arta and Ioannina as peopled by Greeks, while the Albanians occupy the rest of Epirus. It also explains that the latter have a barbarous mode of existence: This people indeed is nomadic, has a rough life and is deprived from cities, fortresses, hamlets, fields or vineyards, only having mountains and plains. The author of the Chronicle of the Tocco, probably a Greek from Ioannina, also emphasizes this cultural gap. Actually the Chronicle of the Tocco multiplies the contemptuous comments about Albanian customs and Albanians generally, frequently recounting their ignorance (underlined by words like ἀμάθητοι, “the ones who did not learn”, ἀπαιδευσία, “lack of education”, ἀγνωσία, “lack of knowledge”, χονδρότητα, “roughness”, παχύτητα, “coarseness”) and their vulgar language and lack of morality (underlined by words as λείξευροι,λείξουροι, “greedy”, σκληροί, “cruel”, κακόγνωμοι, “bad-tempered”, ἐπίορκοι, “perjurers”, κλέπται, “thieves”), all of which characteristics were supposedly the consequence of their “Albanian nature”. The same source offers more positive descriptions on some Albanians, or at least does not use such pejorative terms. This is the case of course when they are allied to Carlo Tocco, but also, for example, of Gjin Boua Spata, despot of Arta, who often made war against Ioannina and against Carlo Tocco. These descriptions however do not gainsay the fact that, for the most part, the Chronicle proclaims an inveterate hostility between the two populations. The Chronicle of Ioannina, although less aggressive, recounts the δυστροπία [peevishness] and the κακογνωμία [bad-temperedness] of the Albanians.......The Chronicle of the Tocco was also very probably an opus commissioned as propaganda by Carlo Tocco, in order to convince the Greeks of Arta to join the state of the Tocco after the end of Albanian domination. Indeed, we have no evidence as to whether the people of Arta were as obsessed by Hellenism as the people of Ioannina, nor is there any trace of rebellion against the Albanians. By contrast, '''after the death in 1399 of the Albanian Despot of Arta, Gjin Boua Spata, and the coup by a poorly documented adventurer called Bogoes, the people of Arta revolted, expelled Bogoes and granted power to Muriki Spata, grandson of the late Gjin Spata. Particularly significant is the fact that they did not, as far as we know, seek help from the city of Ioannina, nor renewed unity with it. The death of Muriki Spata in 1414, during a particularly vicious war against Ioannina, sparked second insurrection. The legal heir, his brother Yaqub Spata, who had become a Muslim, claimed the succession but was expelled by the city’s archons. When he returned with Ottoman soldiers, the population rebelled, imprisoned the archons and opened the doors to Yaqub.''' Unfortunately, we cannot identify the nationality of the archons or the population. Probably, they were both ethnically mixed. The significant point is that, in order to save the city’s independence, the people of Arta were ready to ally with the Ottoman Turks, just as had the people of Ioannina before. This symmetry puts into perspective the violence of Albanian campaigning against Ioannina, since the soldiers of this latter city behaved in a comparable manner when invading the territory of Arta or capturing Albanians..... '''the Albanian leaders, while wielding authority in Epirus, tried to become Byzantine. They legally adopted the Byzantine titles of Despot and of Sebastocrator, which the Greeks of Ioannina were sometimes ready to recognize113. They tried to live in cities and to maintain a court, in the Byzantine manner. Generally, the city of Arta – relatively unknown during the period of Albanian domination – had seemingly changed little: the attested activities of Arta as a commercial centre, as well as the remains of the Byzantine churches used by the Albanian lords, demonstrate that Albanian rule was not a synonymous with a return to barbarism and the end of Byzantine civilization....Italian soldiers, whose number is impossible to determine, are also reported among the Tocco troops, but also among those of the Albanian Despot of Arta, Gjin Spata' The Ethnic Composition of Medieval Epirus Brendan Osswald University of Toulouse II - Le Mirail Aigest (talk) 12:25, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

WP:IDONTLIKEIT activity by Aigest
Actually we have the definition of wp:idontlikeit: rejecting entire bibliographies of credible authors in order to present an pure Albanian origin... By the way bombarding the discussion with irrelevant material just weakens your arguments (how pathetic, nothing of the above describes the origins of this family&tribe).

In case you don't explain why you ignore Winnifrith-Hammond-Madgearu, a revert of this [] is a matter of time.Alexikoua (talk) 13:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

WP:IDONTHEARTHAT activity by Alexikoua
Explained above. Just scroll the page. A lot of kilobytes with explanations, apparently you didn't read (or pretended to) Aigest (talk) 14:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Madgearu
. Question: Should we mention that the Boua/Shpata family was 'probably' of Aromanian/Vlach origin, apart from Albanian, since this is mentioned in credible several works on the subject? (question 2: Why should we hide this? for the same reason). 23:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Since too much disruption took place by several nationalistic ip and revert only accounts in the past. I'll summarize the specific passages. In case there is still not a single real argument (bombarding with irrelevant stuff isn't an argument), this has better to stop:

Winnifrith:[]

''According to John Kantakouzenos some people who lived in no town but inaccessible places in the mountains of Thessaly submitted in 1334 to the Emperor Andronicus III. They were Albanians with no king, called after their tribal chiefs, Malakasii, Bouii and Mesaritae. But these were probably Vlachs; there were in Pouque-ville's time Vlachs in the Pindus who called themselves Bovi, and there is still a village called Malakasi. Elsewhere we hear of the Albanian leader Peter Liosas leading Malakasii of his own race, and this would seem to suggest two kinds of Malakasii. The name may derive from the coastal plain of Mallakastir, a word of Latin origin, in central Albania. The theory that the Bouii came from the nearby highland pastures of the Bevaei is more conjectural. Together with the Albanians the Vlach spenetrated to central and Southern Greece. We hear of Vlachs in Attica, Kephallenia and Crete, although in these instances and in the placenames with a Vlach element which can be found as far south as the southern Peloponnese there may be confusion between Vlachs and shepherds or Albanians.''

Hammond: []They submitted because they were afraid of being attacked during the time of heavy snows. According to John cantacuzenus 1,474, they were Albanians with no king, called after their tribal chiefs, Malakasii, Bouii and Mesaritae. They were in fact Vlachs...(Cantakuzenus says they were Albanians, the author however disagrees).''

and summarizing the two possibilities (Albanian&Aromanian)

[]''For the evidence that they were Vlachs, see E. Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (ed. Bury), 6, p. 391, n. 25. 9. So Weigand (A), p. 276; Wace and Thompson, p. 264 and others. It was argued that G. C. Soulis in Epeteris Byzantinon Spoudon 23 (1953) 213 that Malakasii, etc. were Albanians and not Vlachs, but the fact that the modern Malakasii and Bouii are Vlachs is surely decisive.''

And Koukoudis & Madgearu.

[]: Albanian historians considered Gjin (or Ghinu Buia and Peter Liosha Albanian but it is sure that at least Buia family was of Aromanian origin.

In all this discussion I've heard a series weird arguments like: Madgearu isn't rs (why?), the Bouas were never in Thessaly (historically wrong per above passages), that their origin is pure Albanian because many sources consider Boua Shpata (a 14th century member of the clan) Albanian (?), that the Bouii are not a medieval but a 19th century tribe (also wrong they were attested in 14th century), and that all these historians-experts on this subject are based on a dubious primary-Pouqeville (?).

Since a number of credible historians on the subject mention that the Bouii (a clan that came from Albania, moved to Thessaly (1330s) and then Epirus and with leader were named 'Boua') apart from being considered Albanian they were possibly of Aromanian origin is very likely, this should be mentioned.Alexikoua (talk) 23:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Alexikoua the answers to all your repetitions have been given by Aigest and other users too many times already and please don't misuse their arguments.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 23:45, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Madgearu is ok. The map is good too.Villick (talk) 15:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Very nice, we have no problem then. What's also interesting is that one of the previous opposing editors finds Madgearu ok. So we have not a single problem on adding this sentence (which is oversourced by all mainstream bibliography +a map, by the way ).Alexikoua (talk) 19:27, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Please don't resume wp:ididnthearit activity. Btw since you're so interested in Magdearu why don't you add on Balsa II that he was an Albanian ruler?-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:38, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * @Villick: Thanks for giving, as a third part, a solution to this case. The arguments are overwhelming indeed.Alexikoua (talk) 21:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Villick a third party? Villick isn't a third party(he has taken part in all the previous discussions and ignored Sulmues when he was asked for sources) and even after all the countless sources Aigest added you decided to start again. Btw Alexikoua why on most Albanian-related bio articles your edits are focused on trying to dispute the subject's ethnicity?-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:59, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * @Zjarri: Please be wp:civil, Aigest was just flooding the talkpage with irrelevant comments. We have 2 possibilities. As I see Villick answered.Alexikoua (talk) 22:08, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Aigest wasn't flooding the talkpage with any irrelevant comments, but with sources which neither you nor Villick refuted and now you're revert-warring again.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 22:13, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Please calm down and read all the above discussion. We have two possibilities: Boua/Bouii was one clan. Unfortunatelly Aigest couldn't prove that we have 2 diferrent clans, see also Hammond's map. Recycling the same discussions starts to become boring. Alexikoua (talk) 22:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hammond says that there were two clans and you're recycling the same refuted arguments. Hammond's map isn't related to the family or the subject of this article.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 22:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Again wrong: Hammond says about one clan (Bouii/Boua). This one clan was of uncertain origin (Albanian or Aromanian), apart from Hammond all mainstream authors agree on that (Madgearu for example). Alexikoua (talk) 22:37, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The mainstream scholars are those added by Aigest and they say nothing about any Aromanian Shpatas or Buas. Aigest has also added the whole sections from Hammond, who doesn't say that the Bua were one Aromanian clan. Btw if Madgearu's views are so mainstream, why don't you add them on House of Balšić replacing the Serbian ethnicity with an Albanian one?-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 23:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Alexikoua please stop labeling Villick, who has reverted and taken part in all the previous discussions as a third party. Aigest had warned you about the snippet abuse and he added the whole sections from Hammond.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 00:09, 17 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Just take a good look on Hammond's map. As I see this is just a national tag-teaming concert with 0 arguments. Please remain on topic: This article is called 'Boua Shpata'. If you are interested on 'House of Balsic' this is not the right talkpage. Also avoid wp:npa violation against users that disagree with you.

It seems that Villick and Future Perfect disagree with the 'Albanian purity version'. We should be in general carefull and at least respect third part opinions in this project.Alexikoua (talk) 00:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Alexikoua please don't attribute motives to others(FutureP) or label involved users as third parties(Villick). You and Villick are the only two users, who even when your snippet abuse was refuted you still insisted on your pov(WP:IDHT).-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 00:20, 17 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Villick 'is' a third part as well as Future. wp:IDHT applies perfectly to you in this case. It seems that apart from tag-teaming you have no arguments left. To sum up: Hammond, Madgearu, Winnifrith agree on that. Also consider that tag-teaming again as you did in the past will lead you just with a new restriction.Alexikoua (talk) 00:31, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You're suming up the same refuted snippet abuse, sources misuse and fringe theories as before and please don't WP:IDHT especially when the whole sources have been brought.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 17:12, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Please read wp:what wikipedia is not. You seem to completely ignore the entire discussion, since a mountain of evindence and especially a map that clearly says that this tribe was Vlach, is not what you pretent to be for the usual reasons to claim ethnic purity (By the way Dbmann's claim fits properly in this case).Alexikoua (talk) 17:29, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Please stick to the sources(Hammond doesn't relate the Bua-Shpata with any Aromanian Bouii) and btw Madgearu is even more fringe than Kushtrim123 and Aigest have already said The Greek cities and the Illyrian and Thracian tribes were virtually common peoples, with a common language, but they were never unified under a single political organization., so Alexikoua since you consider him rs please use him on Illyrian language, Thracian language and Greek language to label them as common languages and that ancient Greeks, Illyrians and Thracians were the same people.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 18:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

As I've excected the quote you gave has 0 hist [] in this book. Also the Bouii were 'one' tribe as 'all' the bibliography concludes, something that all third parties agree on that. Seems we have a typical or concert, part of a national agenta someone in wiki should avoid. Madgearu is fine. If you have any problem you need to start a new case, although I feel you have completely run out of arguments.Alexikoua (talk) 20:37, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Alexikoua your WP:IDHT is becoming more and more disruptive since p.10 on the first link has that quote, so please don't cite fringe sources like Madgearu. Btw even your link has the quote . Since Madgearu is fine, please use him on Illyrians, Thracians, Greeks and their languages to define them as common languages and common people.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Please focus on the topic: There is not the slightest argument presented so far, so since the wp:rfc was clearly against this 'national purity version' I guess that evedence is striking about the unclear status of this tribe (both text and images).Alexikoua (talk) 22:01, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * There has been no rfc about Madgearu or your or(Hammond doesn't relate the Bua-Shpata with the modern Aromania Bouii of Thessaly). Since you're insisting that Madgearu is rs, the fringe quotes from his work are relevant. Please stick to the sources and don't attribute motives.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 22:32, 17 January 2011 (UTC)


 * sorry: "with the modern Aromania Bouii of Thessaly"?.... Seems you have need to take a look at Hammond's map, it's about '14th century A.D.'. Off course we are talking about one single tribe with an unclear orihin (the rfc was about this, something we should respect).Alexikoua (talk) 14:30, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Alexikoua please stick to the sources. Hammond doesn't connect the Bua-Shpata family with any Aromanian Bouii. -- — ZjarriRrethues — talk
 * Sorry, but again wrong [], per Hammond the Bouii clan named after their leader was probably Vlach. Please read the discussion above instead of making out of topic statements (and contrary to the wp:rfc result).Alexikoua (talk) 17:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Aigest has added the whole quotes from Hammond, so please stick to the sources. Hammond doesn't say that the Bua-Shpata or that the family of Bua was Aromanian, but that some people called Bouii, who migrated in Thessaly in the middle ages were called both Albanians and Aromanians.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Bingo, seems you are now fully convinced that the Bouii were called both Albanians and Aromanians, due to their unclear origin. This view was also found completely reasonable by Sulmues [] (apart from the wp:rfc that was very clear on that). So, now I think we are more than clear to make the right adjustments. I will place the map too.Alexikoua (talk) 21:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

(unindent)Alexikoua Hammond doesn't relate any Bua-Shpata with any Aromanian Bouii, so please stick to Hammond. Btw Aigest has already refuted this.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 22:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Aigest (he just provided irrelevant quotes) and you should respect both wp:rfc or at least Sulmue's view. I'm sorry but now you are completely oring without providing any arguments (1. you pretended that Bouii were a modern Thessalian tribe, 2. assumed that Bouii are two diferrent tribes, 3. claim that Aigest has answered instead of you so you don't need to provide any argument....). I'm sorry but after all this your are deep into wp:trolling territory.Alexikoua (talk) 14:43, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

(unindent)Your or isn't related to the map, the rfc or Sulmues. Aigest provided the relevant quotes, since Hammond doesn't connect Bua-Shpata with any Aromanians. Btw the same long quotes have been used to refute you many times and you still refuse to acknowledge that Hammond calls Bua-Shpata Albanian and doesn't make any connections with Aromanians.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:35, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Etymology of Spata
Spathe or Spatha (σπάθη, σπάθα, σπαθί) is a classical Greek word. Its original meaning possibly was a long wooden part of the loom. See http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Tela.html

''The simplest and probably the most ancient was in the form of a large wooden sword (spatha, σπάθη, dim. σπάθιον, Brunck, Anal. I.222; Plato, Lysis, p119; Aesch. Choeph. 226). From the verb σπαθάω, to beat with the spatha, cloth rendered close and compact by this process was called σπαθητός (Athen. XII p525D).''

The word was imported to Latin and from there to Italian as spada, meaning also "swordsman" (http://www.wordreference.com/iten/spada).

In the Byzantine Empire "spatharios" was the bodyguard or soldier armed with Spathe (sword) and Protospatharios was a title awarded to senior generals and provincial governors, as well as to foreign princes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Euzen (talk • contribs) 17:07, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Variations and derivatives of this word are common names in Balkan countries and Italy, e.g. Spathas, Spatharis (Greece), Spatarul (Romania), Spada, Spaducci (Italy).--Euzen (talk) 17:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Euzen all European words related to spatha and to each other from the PIE *sph2-dh-, so for future reference please read wp:or.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 17:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I know ZR, you don't need to invoke OR so often. I commented on etymology because I red above a citation that "John Spatas (shpate in Albanian meaning a sword)". However, the connection with the Byzantine title of Spatharioi and Protospatharioi is obvious and could be helpfull for the reader. (I said "byzantine" not "Greek" (lol))--Euzen (talk) 10:49, 7 October 2010 (UTC).


 * You should have a direct link between your claim and the person, published from a WP:RS, just like Hammond above (eg. Hammond, see above cited "In 1358 the Albanians overran Epirus, Acarnania and Aetolia, and established two principalities under their leaders, John Spatas (shpate in Albanian meaning a sword) and ....". That Hammond citation might be included in etymology section if it is needed. You don't do it like that and that's why your position is called WP:OR. Look there are several times by now that I strongly advise you to read WP:OR and WP:RS. If you insist in continuing like this, your behavior might be considered as WP:Trolling. That is also what others are saying to you. Aigest (talk) 11:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Shpata family
There is no reference of Shpata being of Vlach origin. All the references for Shpata family regard them as Albanians This edit is a falsification of the sources. For the Bua family see debate above Aigest (talk) 12:43, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:40, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Cheap novel as reference
I'm afraid that books such as this [], published by unknown publisher and written by novel book author, fails completely wp:rs in the field of history. Not to mention that it completely lacks verivication to the specific quote, due to lack of access to gbooks (and of course isn't in English).Alexikoua (talk) 05:54, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Bua family
Did John belong to the Bua family?--Z oupan 10:02, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
 * The Spata and Bua were not related.--Z oupan 01:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)  Stricken per WP:SOCKSTRIKE. --Calthinus (talk) 12:44, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Widespread and flagrant misquoting
The article suffers from widespread and deliberate misquoting. An example: in the article Hammond was quoted to support that "In 1380, Thomas made an offensive with the help of Turks reaching up to the upper Kalamas River, where however, the Albanians and particularly the Vlach Mazarakioi held firm." The full quote by Hammond is No Vlachs, so the editor who wrote that was deliberately inserting the word "Vlach" in complete disregard of the source. Madgearu (2008) doesn't even discuss this person as Vlach. The worst thing is that these quotes have been on this talkpage for 10 years with no attempt made to correct them. The community is again dealing with misquoting by the same editors.--Maleschreiber (talk) 11:01, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 27 November 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a 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: moved. Per consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 14:58, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

John Spata → Gjin Bua Shpata – The name John Spata is a mix of an anglicized variant which doesn't appear frequently in modern bibliography and the misspelling "Spata". In line with the choice in contemporary bibliography to use native names, I propose to rename the article to Gjin Bua Shpata.
 * "John Spata": 0-3 results (all of them may actually be unrelated)
 * "Gjin Bua Shpata": 37 results Maleschreiber (talk) 21:01, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The link above [] although it offers 37 hits only 3 of them are English language scholarship ([][][]. Top graded scholars on medieval history prefer to use different variants of the name: Fine [] John Spata, Osswalt [] Gjin Boua Spata.
 * As such Boua Spata [] (29 results) receives is the most common form in western scholarship (especially English and French), and "Gjin Boua Spata" form appears the most appropriate in terms of English results. Alexikoua (talk) 03:26, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * If you search specifically for Gjin Boua Spata (instead of Boua Spata which doesn't refer exclusively to him), you'll get 9 results. The variant Boua by default can't be used regardless of the results for cross-article consistency reasons as the relevant article is named Bua and all medieval figures who held the name Bua have titles which use this variant (Mercurio Bua, Peter Bua). --Maleschreiber (talk) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Good call, I support the move per nom.-- ౪ Santa ౪ 99°  04:19, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support The subject is not much known in English literature. The proposed name seems to be more common than John Spata. Also it is clearer because some "John Spata" results on GoogleBooks refer to a Medieval English papal chaplain named John Spata. Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)