Talk:Skanderbeg/Archive 7

Who was whose vassal?
The text of the article says:


 * Following Skanderbeg's requests, King Alfonso V helped him in this situation and the two parties signed the Treaty of Gaeta on March 26, 1451, according to which, Skanderbeg would be formally a vassal of Alfonso in exchange for military aid. More explicitly, Skanderbeg recognized King Alfonso's sovereignty over his lands in exchange for the help that King Alfonso would give to him in the war against the Ottomans. King Alfonso pledged to respect the old privileges of Krujë and Albanian territories and to pay Skanderbeg an annual 1,500 ducats, while Skanderbeg pledged to make his fealty to King Alfonso only after the full expulsion of the Ottomans from the country, a condition never reached in Skanderbeg's lifetime.

I think that this text can mislead readers to believe that this treaty was something only very positive for Skanderbeg who gave nothing (only formal vassalage and vague promise of future fealty) in exchange for money and military aid, like Alfonso became Skanderbeg's vassal.

Sources and real events present different story which includes a negative side of Skanderbeg's cooperation with Naples because this cooperation:
 * influenced on Skanderbeg to start a war against Venice
 * "made his forces party to the war against the Republic of San Marco" and forced him to fight on two fronts, against the Ottomans and against the Signoria making Skanderbeg's realm no more than a link in a broadly spanned chain of Neapolitan vassals against which Venice had spun a net of regional princes in its pay making Balkans the theatre of inner-Italian warfare to which Scanderbeg would eventually fall victim and perish being finally defeated by local Ottoman commanders who were talented figures, equal in every respect to Scanderbeg.

It is very important to follow WP:NPOV and to add information about the negative consequences of Skanderbeg's cooperation with Naples.

Therefore I propose to add to the article one sentence which I believe would summarize negative consequences of Skanderbeg's cooperation with Naples:
 * Skanderbeg's cooperation with the Kingdom of Naples made Skanderbeg an enemy of Republic of Venice and included Skanderbeg's realm into inner-Italian warfare significantly contributing to his final defeat.

Sources:
 * Skanderbeg. Der neue Alexander auf dem Balkan, Oliver Jens Schmitt
 * Skanderbeg. Der neue Alexander auf dem Balkan, Oliver Jens Schmitt

If nobody objects I will add above mentioned sentence to the article?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:21, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Background of the "worsening of relations" between Venice and Skanderbeg
The text of the article explains the background of the Albanian–Venetian War (1447–1448) with following sentence:


 * The later affirmation of Skanderbeg and his rise as a strong force on their borders, however, was seen as a menace to the interests of the Republic, leading to a worsening of relations and the dispute over the fortress of Dagnum which triggered the Albanian-Venetian War of 1447–1448.

This text can mislead readers about the real background of this war which had nothing to do with Venice's view about Skanderbeg's affirmation or Venice's perception of Skanderbeg's strong force. The real background of the Albanian–Venetian War is obvious from the sources and real events which present completely different story:
 * 1) During a conflict between members of the League of Lezha (who were never really united) Nikola Dukagjin killed Leke Zakaria, the lord of realm with towns Dagnum, Sati, Gladri and Dušmani.
 * 2) Zakaria's mother and local population of Zakaria's realm preferred Venice to any of the local chieftains  members of the League of Lezha because of their hostility toward the League of Lezha
 * 3) therefore they supported Venetian troops who put under their control Dagnum and rest of the Zakaria's possessions (Sati, Gladri and Dušmani)
 * 4) when Venice refused Skanderbeg's demand to give him control over all above towns plus Drivast,
 * 5) Skanderbeg was seduced by the Kingdom of Naples to start the war against Venice
 * 6) without being supported by all local lords from the Northern Albania.

Sources (besides mentioned in above section):

I propose to replace the above mentioned misleading sentence with another one which would summarize the real background of the Albanian–Venetian War:


 * Population of the realm of Lekë Zaharia was hostile toward the League of Lezha and supported the Venetian troops to capture towns of Zakaria's realm (Dagnum, Sati, Gladri and Dušmani) when Zakaria was killed in the battle with another member of League (from Dukagjini family). Venetian refusal to accept Skanderbeg's demands for control over the towns of former Zakaria's realm justified Skanderbeg's war against Venice started under influence of the Kingdom of Naples.

--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:25, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:SYNTH (i.e deductions that don't exist in the sources).-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 00:21, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you point to deduction which doesn't exist in the sources?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:26, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * under influence etc. i.e being involved in a war for the promotion of what you consider beneficial for your realm can't be summarized in the misleading under influence nor can that phrase be deduced from the existing sources.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 00:40, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Now I understand the problem. You did not notice that I also referred to sources "mentioned in above section" and I did not provide the quote from Schmitt's work:
 * His hostility towards Venice, influenced at least by Naples, Skanderbeg: ein Aufstand und sein Anführer - Oliver Jens Schmitt
 * Any other deduction which doesn't exist in the sources? --Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * While Nicol can use terms like seduced in that manner, we can't use them(WP:WORDS etc.). Btw why are you quoting Schmitt's references to events that happened after the 1447-8 war?-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 01:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I did not use Nicol's term seduced in the proposed sentence. I used term influenced.
 * Schmitt referred to Skanderbeg's hostility toward Venice, not to any event that happened after 1447-8 war.
 * Here is what Schmitt also says about Skanderbeg's aliance and this war with Venice: The alliance of nobles used up most of its energy in feuds with Venice and the towns of northern Albania, wars that it waged in conjunction with the Serb despot and the leader of Montenegro on behalf of the Kingdom of Naples .
 * Here is a source written by Stavro Skendi who confirms that "The relations between the Albanian hero and the Aragonian-Neapolitan King seem to have started in 1447"
 * --Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:45, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * --Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:45, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 23 March 2012
i do wonder about the neutrality of this article. is it possible to flag some of these areas?

88.235.136.203 (talk) 10:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Note: You have not specified an edit to be made.
 * The template should be placed on a talk page to request an edit only when accompanied by a clear and specific description of the requested change.
 * consensus should be obtained before the template is added.

If you have specific concerns about aspects of this article, then please discuss them here on this page. Once the discussion is complete, and you are ready to request a specific change to the article, feel free to place another edit request template, if it is still necessary. Thanks. Begoon &thinsp; talk 10:33, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

"Chief of the League of the Albanian people"
This edit added an important assertion about the title of Skanderbeg's position within the league.

I could not find it in other reliable sources.

I don't think that such important assertion at the top of the lede should be based only on Charles A. Frazee. He is a professor of church history at Episcopal Theological School who made many obvious mistakes in his work (just a quick view of the page 33 with this assertion is enough for initiated users).

If this was really the title of Skanderbeg's position within the league then it should not be so hard to present some other reliable sources which support it within reasonable period of time. Otherwise, I think it should be removed from the lede.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * This is a work published by the Cambridge University Press i.e stick to the sources or take CUP to RSN. Of course the title is mentioned in other sources too .-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 15:59, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Why should I take CUP to RSN? CUP is not the source, it is only the publisher. Nobody disputed the reliability of the publisher.
 * There are many notable scholars who researched Skanderbeg and published numerous works on him. If none of them mentioned this title then it is obviously just one among many mistakes of Mr. Frazee in his presented work.
 * Three additional sources you presented are far from being reliable for this important assertion you inserted into the beginning of the lede. One magazine, one outdated Geographical handbook series and the only work of Susan E. Pritchett Post titled "Women in Modern Albania: Firsthand Accounts of Culture and Conditions" containing summary of interviews with over 200 Albanian women at the end of 90's.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:07, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The word "source" as used on Wikipedia has three related meanings:the piece of work itself (the article, book), the creator of the work (the writer, journalist), and the publisher of the work i.e take it to RSN. That's part of the background Pritchett provides in her anthropological work not an interview.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:41, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I will not "take CUP to RSN" because RSN deals with sources, not publishers. I provided well argumented explanations that sources you presented are insufficient to support such important assertion you inserted at the top of the lede of this article. Please don't continue with advices like "take CUP to RSN" or to insisit on Prichet's (only published) work about "Women in Modern Albania" as source for Skanderbeg's title. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:01, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

(unindent) The word "source" as used on Wikipedia has three related meanings:the piece of work itself (the article, book), the creator of the work (the writer, journalist), and the publisher of the work i.e if you don't think that the work/writer/publisher I used as a source isn't RS take it to RSN.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:17, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I politely asked you not to repeat that I should "take to RSN" publisher (or work or writer). This is not a reliabiliy issue. I already explained that the assertion of Mr. Frazee should be supported with more reliable sources before it could be added to the top of the lede. A core wikipedia policy says: Editing from a neutral point of view (NPOV) means representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. You violated NPOV policy when you presented a view of one church historian like a significant view, even inserted it to the top of the lede. Unless it is supported with more reliable sources that view (supported only with one magazine, one outdated Geographical handbook and the only work of Susan E. Pritchett Post titled "Women in Modern Albania") is far from being significant and should be removed. Probably not only from the lede, but from the article as well.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:04, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * @Zjarri, Antidiskriminator's comments make perfect sense. If "Chief of the League of the Albanian people" indeed was his real title, we should be able to find Frazee's primary source, but if there is none, we remove it.--Z oupan 16:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It is not this way it works around here. If you have any complaints about the sources go to WP:RSN. Aigest (talk) 08:45, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you Aigest for your explanation "how it works around here". I was misguided to believe that consensus is the primary way decisions are made on Wikipedia.
 * There are claims that Skanderbeg was Slav or Greek.
 * Source:
 * Since you supported the reliablity of this source at RSN I am sure you wouldn't mind adding this assertion to the top of the lede. Or would you?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:32, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Please take it to RSN if you don't consider Frazee RS.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:34, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Tribalda
There is a long-standing consensus not to mention anything about her ethnicity etc. on this article, so please stick to it.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 17:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * There is no such consensus. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Listine?
The reference number 73 of the latest version of the article contains the following text:


 * ASV, Senato Deliberazioni da Mar, V, fl. 8; Ljubic: Listine, X, nr. XXV

Does it mean that the source used for this reference is:



--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:06, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Since nobody replied for two months, I guess it does.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

George Castriot
Castriot/Castrioti:
 * "George Castriot" -Llc - 6,870 hits
 * "George Castrioti" -Llc - 644 hits

Kastriot/Kastrioti:
 * "George Kastriot" -Llc - 175 hits
 * "George Kastrioti" -Llc - 690 hits

Per Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) "It is generally advisable to use the most common form of the name used in reliable sources in English..." so last name of Skanderbeg should be changed to Castriot. Does anybody have anything against it? --Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:39, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Why did you omit searching for Gjergj Kastrioti (~1750 results(which is the most common form used throughout the modern era))? Outdated forms aren't used as the titles of biographies indicate (less than 50 21st works use George Castriot). For another discussion regarding modern vs. outdated uses check the move discussion on Palaiologos.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 16:00, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think Antid. want to change the article name, but change the intro. It says "George Kastrioti Skanderbeg (6 May 1405 – 17 January 1468), widely known as Skanderbeg (from Turkish: İskender Bey, meaning "Lord Alexander", or "Leader Alexander"; Albanian: Gjergj Kastrioti Skënderbeu)" when it should be "George Castriot Scanderbeg ... Albanian: Gjergj Kastrioti Skënderbeu".--Z oupan 16:21, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't state the opposite and the principles remain the same.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 16:25, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No, read the intro - then it would be "Gjergj Kastrioti (6 May 1405 – 17 January 1468), widely known as Skanderbeg (Albanian: Skënderbeu, from Turkish: İskender Bey, meaning "Lord Alexander", or "Leader Alexander")" there should be some consistency, either "George Castriot" or "Gjergj Kastrioti" and "Scanderbeg" or "Skanderbeg". "Skanderbeg" is bolded twice.--Z oupan 16:52, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Most of the sources used in this article use Castriot form.
 * The most credible English language experts who are specialists in the subject use Castriot form (Kenneth Setton, Franz Babinger, John Van Antwerp Fine, Robert Elsie...). Albanian historian Fan Noli ( cited 45 times in this article ) who wrote his work originally on English langage also supported Castriot form.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I think we should better live it that way, Scanderbeg, with redirects. The same applies for Gjon Kastrioti. Majuru (talk) 22:03, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Just to clarify: I did not propose renaming of the article. I proposed to change form of Skandebeg's last name from Kastrioti to Castriot. That is also the most common form of the name used in reliable sources in English in case of his father Gjon Castriot and his family.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:02, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

General Books LLC
Noli's work published in 2009 is published by General Books LLC. Is it the same work published in 1947?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * General Books publication date: 2009 Original publication date: 1947 Original Publisher: International Universities Press Subjects: Albania Notes: This is a black and white OCR reprint of the original.
 * I propose to replace 2009 reprint with 1947 original. Anybody against it?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:07, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Improvised
I removed improvised: sth. produced or made from whatever is available, in this case being not so. Majuru (talk)
 * Here a link to discussion about the CoA presented to the readers as the CoA of Kastrioti family.
 * Here is important clarification of the author of the image.
 * I think that it is best to either add "improvised" or to remove this image until the sourcing issue is resolved.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The coat-of-arms of Scanderbeg, in Italy . I think the question is settled now. Majuru (talk) 13:06, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I am afraid that the question is not settled. The link you presented does not contain reliable blazon which could be the source for version of CoA inserted to this article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:50, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Further informations, can be obtained here, with blazons, etc. Sorry, no motto! By the way, you should bear in mind that the black eagle on a red background, was used by Scanderbeg after the League of Lezha. Majuru (talk) 17:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Do you want to say that this version of CoA:
 * was not CoA of Castrioti family but Skanderbeg's only?
 * was not CoA of League of Lezhe?
 * that Leage of Lezhe was disestablished before Skanderbeg's death (please present the year)?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:30, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Appendix explanation as verifiable source
Since when appendix explanation has gained in value as scientific fact? Here in this article not once but several times appendix explanation is used to verify a claim, which by the way appendix explanation it is NOT a part of the book written by scientist it is only an explanation of authors text made by some group of authors responsible for publishing edition. Some of the claims which I'm talking about are: 1. the source appendix 137 and then again in 138

Just a reminder to the author of this that in top of the Index list of that book is stated:

"No names of modern scholars (and no references to their works) are included to this index"

yllbardh 02:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Sine
The article says (note A) there are many theories about place of birth of Skanderbeg. The only theory presented to the readers is unsourced Sine theory. This issue was already discussed in August 2012 (link) but nobody addressed it almost four months. Therefore I will remove unsourced Sine assertion.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:43, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

The end of League of Lezhe
In 1444 a group of noblemen allied themselves into League of Lezhe.


 * 1) Lekë Zaharia (lord of Sati and Dagnum), and his vassals Pal and Nicholas Dukagjini
 * 2) Peter Spani (lord of the mountains behind Drivasto)
 * 3) Lekë Dushmani (lord of Pult)
 * 4) George Strez, John and Gojko Balšić (lords of Misia)
 * 5) Andrea Thopia (lord of Scuria) with nis nephew Tanush
 * 6) Gjergj Arianiti
 * 7) Theodor Corona Musachi
 * 8) Stefan Crnojević (lord of Upper Zeta) with his three sons Ivan, Andrija and Božidar (the latter was killed by Lekë Dukagjini and members of Zaharia family when he led soldiers to help Skanderbeg in his fight against the Ottomans)

It was also decided that Skanderbeg should be commander of this alliance.

This alliance did not last long.

The sources say that this alliance broke up almost immediately. At the end of 1444 Lekë Zaharia was killed by his vassal Nicholas Dukagjini. Most of the members left the alliance during the Albanian–Venetian War (1447–1448) and with defeats at Berat and Kruje in 1450 this alliance broke up. After its collapse most of its former members signed the Treaty of Gaeta and accepted suzerainty of the Kingdom of Naples.


 * - this author is specialized in Albanian studies
 * Dr. Nuray Bozbora (Shqipëria dhe nacionalizmi shqiptar në Perandorinë Osmane, 1997, trans. to Albanian in 2002, pp. 79-80) puts the specific date at ca. 1450.
 * Oliver Schmitt - a member of the Austrian Academy of Sciences who is specialist in the topic and author of the best biography on Skanderbeg

I propose to change the succession box which implies that League of Lezhe existed after 1450 to correspond with actual events and sources if nobody present any valid counterargument based on more reliable sources.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:33, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Grave of Skanderbeg
The article mentions that "Ottomans found the grave of Skanderbeg in Saint Nicholas, a church in Lezhë". The text of the article does not mention that he was buried there (except the infobox). A source I accidentally found says that his grave was discovered in 1978 in that church. The Church was allegedly destroyed and the mausoleum was built using the remnants of the church. If that information is correct it should be presented to the readers together with the picture of the church if somebody has it. Any thoughts?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:42, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I found out that it was Ippen who asserted that Skanderbeg was burried within the fortifications of Lezhë. His opinion was based on the work of Barletius who wrote that Skanderbeg was buried in the Church of St. Nicholas, without explanation if the church's building was inside or outside the castle. Ippen assumed that such notable person like Skanderbeg would have been buried in the best place of the city, in its castle. He also speculated that this Ottomans transformed this church into a mosque. It might be a good idea to present this information to the readers? --Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:08, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Kanun
There are many sources about Skanderbeg's kanun. Does anybody object to add information about it to the article?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:47, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Serb by mother
Swiss professor of the Vienna's University proves it http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/kultur/buecher/Schweizer-Historiker-beleidigt-Albaner/story/1939246677.105.22.185 (talk) 17:49, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * --Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:30, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Robert Elsie did not give any evidence about that. He is based only on the modern concepts people have for the names. It is not evidence. It is like to say that his son is a German because his name is Jurgen. But, in fact he isn't. If we start to analyze her last name the author has given, there will start the problem of his method. According to him the last name is "Tribalda". It is clear that it is a Latin last name from tribe (n.), from Latin tribus "one of the three ethnic divisions of the original Roman state", from tri- "three" + *bhu-, root of the verb be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.88.58 (talk) 04:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * See Voisava Tripalda. "Tripalda" and "Tribalda" are corruptions (made up names) derived from the fact that she was daughter of a Triballian (most certainly a Serb) lord, possibly of the Branković dynasty.--Z oupan 06:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Skanderbeg
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Skanderbeg's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Rogers2010": From Battle of Kosovo (1448):  From League of Lezhë:  

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:04, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Battle between Gjon Kastrioti and Isa Beg in 1430?
Gjon Kastrioti was in Ottoman service in 1430. Numerous sources do not present information about any battle between Gjon and Isak Beg in 1430, but simply assert that Ottomans took away from him most of the territory governed by Gjon because he did not attack Venetians as he was ordered to by the sultan.

The text of the article presents information, supported by Frasheri's work, that Gjon lost majority of his possessions in the battle with Isa Beg (In 1430, Gjon Kastrioti was defeated in a battle by the Ottoman governor of Skopje, Isa bey Evrenos and as a result, his territorial possessions were extremely reduced).

It would be good to verify what Frasheri says by presenting the full quotation from his work. Will someone who has access to his work present the full quotation?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:56, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

"Rise of Albanian resistance"
According to numerous sources when Kingdom of Hungary, the Serbian Despotate and the Principality of Wallachia decided to launch Crusade of Varna at the end of 1443 they inspired numerous rebellions on the Ottoman territory. One of the rebellions erupted in Albania, led by Gjergj Arianiti, while Skanderbeg was still serving the Ottomans.

The text of the article could mislead the readers to believe that Skanderbeg started rebellion against Ottoman rule in Albania when in fact it was Arianit. If nobody objects this should be clarified in the article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:34, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Hamza's late reaction
"In the beginning of 1457, another nobleman, Hamza Kastrioti, Skanderbeg's own nephew and his closest collaborator, defected to the Ottomans when he lost his hope of succession after the birth of Skanderbeg's son Gjon Kastriot II."

I think that this (unreferenced) sentence does not make much sense. Gjon II was born in 1454. Hamza "defected to the Ottomans" in 1457. If the birth of Skanderbeg's son was his reason to leave Skanderbeg, he would do it three years earlier. If nobody object I propose to remove the part of the sentence after "defected to the Ottomans".--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:06, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Occupation of the Principality of Kastrioti ruled by Skanderbeg's brothers
With this edit User:Irvi Hyka edit warred to restore following unreferenced assertions he added with his bold edits:
 * 1) in 1443 Skanderbeg succeeded his father Gjon Kastrioti as prince of the Principality of Kastrioti.
 * 2) in 1468 Gjon II succeeded Skanderbeg as prince of the Principality of Kastrioti
 * 3) Lekë Dukagjini succeeded Skanderbeg as Chief of the League of Lezhë

All above assertions are incorrect.
 * 1) Gjon died six years earlier, in 1437. Even before he died he was not Prince of Katsrioti, at least not after 1430 when his realm ceased to exist when he was defeated by Isa beg. In 1430 Isa beg allowed Gjon to govern a couple of villages. In 1436 that territory was annexed by the Ottomans and listed in their registers as land of Yuvan-ili.
 * 2) There was no principality of Kastrioti Gjon could be prince of in 1468. After Skanderbeg's death Venetians continued to govern Kruje until Ottomans captured it.
 * 3) Leke Dukagjini was never Chief of the League of Lezhë which actually collapsed in 1450 while Skanderbeg was still alive.

User:Irvi Hyka supported the above mentioned incorrect assertions with his explanation in edit line (was occupied before 1943 and other brothers were alive). It is a thesis that Principality of Kastrioti was actually under Ottoman occupation after 1430 and that although Gjon died 6 years before Skanderbeg allegedly succeeded him as prince of Kastrioti in 1443, it was possible because Skanderbegs' brothers were alive in the meantime. I think that thesis about the occupation of the Principality of Kastrioti ruled by Skanderbeg's brothers ïs absurd and can not be used to support above mentioned incorrect assertions.

--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)


 * @Antidiskriminator see the tree of Kastrioti family, after the dearth of Gjon Kastrioti (Skanderbeg's father) his elder sons Reposh Kastrioti - duke then monk, Stanisha Kastrioti - († 1445?; father of Hamza) and Konstandin Kastrioti were alive. Irvi Hyka 18:15, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Skanderbeg did not succeed his father because his father was already dead for more than five years when Skanderbeg deserted Ottomans and captured Kruje. Skanderbeg's son did not succeed his father at all because he was forced to leave to Italy when Skanderbeg died.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:03, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Skanderbeg as a theme in Albanian history textbooks
Denisa Kostovicova nicely summarized Skanderbeg as a theme in Albanian history textbooks in her work: Kosovo: The Politics of Identity and Space Аутор: Dr Denisa Kostovicova(link):


 * ... in Albanian history textboks... Not only were Albanian-inhabitated territories in the medieval Balkans retroactively nationalized, Skanderbeg himself at the time of his military undertaking is cast as a national hero. Hence, the notions of nation and nationhood were imported into the era that preceded their conceptualization.... Importantly, Skanderbeg's state is regarded as the Albanian state, which 'created important tradition of the Albanians' state life, that remained alive in the Albanians' memory and that was propagated in the subsequent centuries'. Again, the textbooks operated retroactively with a notion of nationally defined statehood.

This is important aspect of Skanderbeg which should be added to the text of this article, along with some basic information about the myth which nationalists created using his figure.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Is Denisa Kostovicova really a reliable source?--Nixious6

Kastrioti adored as national hero by mohammedan albanians, although he fought mohammedan turks?!
'Skanderbeg is Albania's most important national hero': Can someone explain why this is the case? Kastrioti fought against the turks and islam, still (because he ultimately lost) the majority of albanians are mohammedans today, because the turks forced them to convert. Sounds all a bit fuzzy if we apply normal logic, no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.120.231.38 (talk) 18:04, 30 June 2013 (UTC)   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.120.228.89 (talk)
 * Good point. This really should be clarified. Thanks.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:38, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Usually Albanians do not put much importance to religions, they are more sympathetic towards the country and the nation. We can see this is the case from Pashko Vasa's poem O moj Shqypni where he expresses this concept with the following words: "Awake, Albania, it’s time to rise And bind yourselves with brotherly ties; Look not to church or mosque for pietism, The faith of Albanians is Albanianism!". Albania is a country with multiple faith systems but the population are surprisingly secular, might be a benefit from Hoxha's regime. —' Epicurus B. (Not my talk page) ' 18:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your explanation.
 * Albanian indifference to religion is a myth.
 * If Albanians are really indifferent to religion, why would they celebrate Skanderbeg's struggle against mohammedans?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:43, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I wouldn't say it's a myth and I'm not saying that if you are Albanian then somehow automatically you possess secular values, I would however say that indifference towards religion is certainly widespread, in the cities at the very least. They celebrate Skanderbeg's struggle against the Ottomans as a struggle for Albanian unity as a nation, not a struggle for the Christian collection of beliefs. Of course there are some Muslim Albanians who view Skanderbeg as a "villain" and there are some Christian Albanians who view him as a crusader or a holy knight or some such, usually these Albanians tend to be followers of a more extreme form of their religion.—' Epicurus B. (Not my talk page) ' 14:16, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Your comment probably can partially resolve this issue. Will you please present some sources which support your assertion about Skanderbeg struggling for "Albanian unity as a nation" and Albanians celebrating him because of that?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:14, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

After 1463....
the lede present information about post-1463 events.


 * "Left alone to fight the Ottomans, Skanderbeg did so until he died in January 1468"

This is incorrect. Skanderbeg was far from left alone. In period 1463—1468 he was only one of participants of the Ottoman–Venetian War (1463–79). I will correct the above sentence to match the text of the article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:24, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Albanian resistance
The major portion of this article is under "Albanian resistance" section. It frequently mentions "Albanian armies", "Albanian insurrection", "Albanian garrison", "Albanian troops", "Albanian territories", "Albanian noblemen", "Albanian forces", ... which all could mislead readers to believe that this was a struggle between Albanians (used as demonym or ethnicity) and Ottoman Empire. In prevent misleading of readers I added important clarification which is referenced by contemporary historian who is member of the Austrian Academy of Sciences and author of the best biography on Skanderbeg. Since this addition was removed without valid reason I will restore it to the article. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:28, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * We've been through this before. See talk page history on that here an eg.. The same terms are used by Keneth Setton who was "one of the foremost interpreters of medieval Europe and the Crusades, the papacy and the dawn of the Renaissance," for eg albanian resistance, albanian army albanian attack etc. Your add is on WP:COATRACK territory. If you want to speak about the population in medieval Albania go ahead and make an article on that. That does not belong here.

P.S. Not so related but after the death of Scanderbeg many people left the country migrating to Italy. Guess what language do they speak Aigest (talk) 08:40, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The text you removed (diff) is not about the population in medieval Albania but about Skanderbeg's rebellion and its participants. Since nobody removed the terms you mentioned in your reply there was no valid argument for your removal of well referenced assertions.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:58, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

The Siege of Kruje
Regarding the below sentences:

"He lost all of his possessions except Krujë. The other nobles from the region of Albania allied with Murad II as he came to save them from the oppression."

There are several incorrect statements: 1. There is no evidence whatsoever that Skanderbeg lost his possessions after the Siege of Kruje. He lost control over part of them during the siege, but naturally after the Murad retreat, the pre-war situation was restored as Skanderbeg didn't lose any castle. You can rely on sources like Babinger, Frasheri, etc. regarding this. Also, this makes sense as immediately the next year he defeated another Ottoman expedition in the frontier (not near Kruje). 2. There is no evidence whatsoever that nobles allied with Murad II. Some of them (Dukagjini) stayed apart, but no one joined sultan or the action against Skanderbeg. However, the nobles' help was minimal this time, even from Gjergj Arianiti. 3. It is for sure that Murad II wasn't coming to save nobles from Skanderbeg's oppression. Most of them had already lost their territories when Skanderbeg began the revolt and regained them through him. They knew that Murad's intentions was the total subjugation of Albania. Even the treacheries of the next years, were mainly from his own relatives (despaired after his son's birth for lack of succession), not from the nobles. The most they did to protest, was being neutral or connecting with Venice and Alfonso. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MARSELIMADHE (talk • contribs) 08:31, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The assertions you dispute are supported by work of Kenneth Setton for which he received the Haskins Medal of the Medieval Academy of America.
 * "He had lost all of his country except Kroia"
 * "The independent Albanian highlanders ... had made accords with Murad". Even Frasheri confirms this
 * " as though he was their deliverer from the oppression. "--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:39, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Btw just because the main editors of the article are vacationing don't expect to add POV issues that neither belong to the lead nor are mentioned by other sources.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 11:05, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Either take it to the talkpage or it's WP:ANI Antidiskriminator.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:51, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Hostage or Içoğlan
✅

"Sultan Murad II took him hostage..." says the text in the lede.

There are sources which use maybe more precise term: Içoğlan:



Does anybody have anything against replacing hostage with Içoğlan?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Giorgio Castriota
I'd suggest to insert also a reference to his the Italian name (Giorgio Castriota) in the preamble of the article in addition to the Albanian and the Turkish ones. As we can see from the frame on the right part of the article, Skanderbeg used to sign documents with the Italian name, so also this is relevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.92.153.10 (talk) 08:30, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The source for this signature is unknown so this signature should be removed until the source is provided. In order not to clutch the lede with different name versions it was decided to present names within separate section.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:40, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Demetrio Reres
I created an article about Demetrio Reres and while expanding its content I noticed that numerous sources discuss his 1448 military migration to Italy and engagement by Alphonso V. The point is that I could not find any sources about Reres being a commander (General) of Skanderbeg's forces. Also, very few (not so exceptional) sources directly support the assertion that it was actually Skanderbeg who sent Reres to Italy.

This article has the whole paragraph with more than 750 characters about Reres. I am concerned that:
 * 1) This might be irrelevant to the topic of this article because connection with Skanderbeg is poorly sourced. The only source which supports it is 1964 dissertation of George Nicholas Nasse who was specialized in Geography (link). I could not find any other work he authored and I think better source is necessary to connect Reres with Skanderbeg.
 * 2) Reres was given undue weight in this article. Even if somebody presents better sources that prove that Reres was subordinated to Skanderbeg I don't think there is a valid reason to give a whole paragraph with more than 750 characters to Reres. This article is already to long.

Is anybody able to present some better sources that directly support connection between Reres and Skanderbeg?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:42, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I removed poorly sourced paragraph about unrelated Reres.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:47, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

General Grammer/sentence flow improvements; removal of redundancy and unnecessary information
Is anyone interested in making this article better with regards to grammar, sentence compositions, and general flow? It also seems like there is a lot of information that shouldn't be in there, more specifically, many parts of the page go into too much detail when they shouldn't. Other information just seems redundant. Is anyone interested on doing a piece by piece restructuring? Are there any dedicated editors of this page who agree/would be interested? CryogenicFuture (talk) 03:54, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Taking in consideration this comment is your third edit on wikipedia, I am uncertain if you would be able to improve this article in terms of following wikipedia policies and guidelines. That is where I can help.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 06:44, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

albanian?
Kastrioti is a Mijak Macedonian surname, now survived in the Bosnian Bogomils. If he was albanian his name would be Gjergj Zvogëlimin. If you have nothing better to do, check out the wikipedia page about european haplogroups by country and see who is the cuckoo here.89.205.2.29 (talk) 21:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

This is really funny ! In Northern Albania there is a old clan called "Kastrati". It has nothing to do with Macedonian language. AlbertBikaj (talk) 20:45, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Religion
Gjergj Kastrioti Skenderbeg was converted to Catholic after returning in Albania. He is buried in St Nicholas Church in Lezhe. AlbertBikaj (talk) 20:38, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The source you presented is not reliable for Catholicism claim. The exact location of Skanderbeg's grave is unknown. Regarding St Nicholas Church in Lezhe please read this section. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:33, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * The fact that Skanderbeg was converted to Catholicism is a known thing who is also written in most of the books today and by almost all the authors who write about skanderbeg. Some reference about this also  and also ,but also others.I believe that wikipedia should be on the  same page with the real historical events.that he adopted christianity is clear and everyone can know that, but someone who enters here, wants to have more detailed info about skanderbeg and i think this should be precised since we are talking about the biography of someone,and religion is an important part of it.Some of the soureces have been used as reference on pages here like History of Albania page so of course they are a reliable sourse.RcLd-91 (talk) 20:43, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * If that is really "the fact" covered by "most of the books today" and by "almost al authors who write about Skanderbeg" I am sure there are contemporary secondary sources written by experts in the subject that support it. Until somebody produces this kind of sources the text should remain neutral, as explained in FAQ. The sources you presented are not that kind of sources. They are texts of internet websites of unknown authorship, tertiary souces and general country overview. Skanderbeg married in Orthodox church while his father and brother lived and died in Orthodox monastery Hilandar. That is why exceptional assertion that Skanderbeg "reembraced Roman Catholicism" needs exceptional sources. The presented sources do not even pass regular reliability criteria. The same goes for private website of J Mark Hord which supports what Skanderbeg told to Albanians in Kruje. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:35, 9 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Give the reference that he embranced orthodoxy and maybe your claims can be verifiable, meanwhile sentences about "catholicism" are referenced thing,you cant remove referenced text as you like,typical wp:i dontlikeit. Some of the sources have been used as reference on pages here as i said, so of course they have been considered as a reliable source.you cant pretend that references are or are not reliable only by YOUR way of judgement, sources were given,not only one but three.if you are going to remove it, then the sources should be flagged as not reliable and not be used in all the other pages, like History of Albania, etc.

ABOUT the website of J Mark Hord, well that has been used as a reference to support some of the sentences in the page "timeline of skanderbeg", so of course it is a source who can be reliable and has been used in the same page that im using it, you cant decide which source is reliable only by your way of judging,not fair.RcLd-91 (talk) 22:15, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The burden is on you, not on me. Pointing to other articles that use the same sources is not valid argument for your position. You added J Marko Hord to other article (diff) and now you use it as argument here. That is disruptive.
 * You violated WP:BRD. Please revert yourself.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:21, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Rise of new resistance or taking on the leadership of the existing one
Kenneth M. Setton says in his A History of the Crusades: The Impact of the Crusades on Europe that Albanian Revolt of 1432–36 simmered until Skanderbeg took on its leadership in 1443.



I propose to clarify that Skanderbeg did not rise new resistance in Albania but took on the leadership of the existing simmering one.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:58, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

There is a summary about Skanderbeg written by Setton in the same work, p. 266, which includes the following text:



I think this summary is useful for further article building because it is well written and contains some important points which do not exist in the article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:16, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

-- Refers to the 'Albanian-Turkish Wars of 1443-78', clearly a separate war from the previous rebellion.
 * Unlikely. This rebellion was crushed by the Ottomans after local failings. Sources state that when Skandeberbeg arrived in 1443 and took Kruje, many other followed him and he began a new rebellion.
 * -- Refers to Skanderbeg arriving in Albania and starting the war.
 * -- Refers to Skanderbeg arriving in Albania and starting the war.
 * Your own source says rebellion 'simmered', you cannot seriously interpret from that that the war from 1443 was one conflict as the one that ended in 1436. French resistance 1940-1945 was not part of the Battle of France, in the same way that small scale rebellion 1436-1443 was not the same as the large scale battle fought by armies (not small tribal rebels) in the 1432-36 and 1443 onwards conflicts.
 * -- States that Skanderbeg proclaimed Albania independent and insurrection begun to spread. ie - insurrection hadn't already spread, but the rebellion started upon Skanderbeg's arrival.

I don't think it is right to add in your suggested edit as it is only partially supported by one source, and contradicted by many more. I don't think it would be helpful for the integrity of the article for it to be edited using the suggested quote. Ujkrieger (talk) 12:24, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Truly his signature?
There is a signature embedded in the article. And there are two problems with this signature:



1. It's just a chopped snippet. From this source: A "signature" is complete or it isn't a signature.

2. Truly Skanderbeg's signature? From the 15th century? With a seperator at the end, a colon and a comma?

I dont't think so. It looks more like a snippet line from a book.

There is nothing in the description of this "signature"-file about the source. It just claims to be Skanderbeg's signature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Skanderbeg_signature.jpg

So I'll take it off.

Peet, --141.70.4.35 (talk) 04:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Good point. The signature should have been remeved not only because it was unsourced. Skanderbeg's letters were written by scribes. They signed those letters, not Skanderbeg. Depending on the language they used, there are several different signatures used. Picking only one of the signatures and presenting it as Skanderbeg's is wrong. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Skanderbeg's Name, or: There is a difference between a real name and a pseudonym (a.k.a.)
I corrected yesterday the mixed name "George Kastrioti Skanderbeg" to "George Kastrioti" in the article. The reason can be found in the article history:

''Seperation of his real name (George Kastrioti) with his commonly known name (Skanderbeg) -- as it is common, like in the quoted references. The previously so-called "George Kastrioti Skanderbeg" was a misleading new creation, a mix of names.''

I just want to mention this also on this talk page for further editors, to keep the articel clean and correct.

Peet, --141.70.4.35 (talk) 01:53, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Unresolved issues in archive
Unresolved issues in archive.--Z oupan 13:41, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Coins
Where can one find coins minted for Skanderbeg?
 * Ђурђ од Костура -(Скендербег по арбанашком називу) кнез .Од овог кнеза познат је само једна врста сребрног новца као на слици.Врло је редак и скуп. све фотографије новчица и текст уз њих сложио је на форуму Крстарица "Брајић 286" 2008 године.--Z oupan 10:34, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I probably read hundreds of different sources on Skanderbeg and I don't remember any of them mentions coins minted by Skanderbeg. Kostur is Serbian language name for Kastoria. I think Skanderbeg have never been in Kastoria nor he ever had title of duke. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:52, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "Ђурђ од Костура [and the rest]" is only an entry by some forum editor (prone to errors). I too, cannot find any data on him minting his own coins.--Z oupan 15:50, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I found a source which probably supports the possibility that Skanderbeg actually did mint coins (though my Google Translation based translation which might be wrong):
 * --Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:36, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * No. I found additional source which clarifies that the coins in question were minted in 1454 in Albania by Ramon d'Ortafa on behalf of the King of Naples.
 * --Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:15, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Common names
Per Google Ngram, by far the most common name is "Skanderbeg", followed by "Gjergj Kastrioti", followed by "George Kastrioti". Khestwol (talk) 10:11, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Most common English/Anglicised name
Template:Infobox royalty says that the field for the name should contain "Most common English/Anglicised name".

replaced George Kastrioti with Gjergj Kastrioti (diff). I reverted this bold edit (diff) and explained in the edit line that Template:Infobox request name which is most common Anglicised English name. Instead to follow wp:brd Khestwol edit warred (diff) to replace George Kastrioti with Gjergj Kastrioti.

Khestwol continued to push Gjergj position with changing not only infobox but first sentence too (diff). The name of Skanderbeg is defined as George for about 5 years. After thousands of edits of dozens of editors it can be said that it is based on the consensus. I object its unilateral change, without receiving consensus. Khestwol, will you please be so kind to follow WP:BRD, restore pre-edit war name, present your arguments and reach consensus for your position before replacing George with Gjergj. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:02, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello . Please see the ngrams above. It has been demonstrated that the most common in English is "Skanderbeg", followed by "Gjergj Kastrioti". If you could kindly show me that "Gjergj Kastrioti" is uncommon in English, I will be happy to remove it from the infobox. Cheers, Khestwol (talk) 11:05, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. Will you please be so kind to explain why you refuse to follow WP:BRD and restore pre-edit war name?
 * Here are my arguments for my position that you should first reach consensus before you replace George with Gjergj:
 * Gjergj is Albanian language name. Not Anglicized, per request of the Template:Infobox royalty.
 * Per WP:GOOGLETEST, search engine does not determine what is common name, Anglicized or not. It says: "Depending on the subject matter, and how carefully it is used, a search engine test can be very effective and helpful, or produce misleading or non-useful results. In most cases, a search engine test is a first-pass heuristic or "rule of thumb" ." -Undeline is mine.
 * Kastrioti family had more than one version of their surname: Castriot/Kastriot/Kastrioti/Castrioti... George has much more NGram hits than Gjergj which seems to go almost exclusively with Kastrioti. Take this for example: Link to Ngrams comparation of George Castrioti/Gjergj Kastrioti. Together with other surname versions, George has significant advantage over Gjergj.
 * I believe that vast majority of English language sources that extensively deal with the subject, including those used in the article, prefer George - (even Noli).--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:41, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the new ngram, now it makes sense to say that George is more common than Gjergj. Our new ngram shows that after "Skanderbag", the most common form of his name is "George Castriot". So given your comments and new evidence, I think the lede can be changed to this: George Castriot or Gjergj Kastrioti, commonly known as Skanderbeg ... I think it is important to mention in the article that "Gjergj Kastrioti" (the third-most common name, after "Skanderbeg" and "George Castriot") is also extensively used in English, and not only Albanian. We cannot ignore the new evidence. Likewise, we can also put "George Castriot" in the infobox after "Skanderbeg", because "George Castriot" is also common in English. Khestwol (talk) 12:00, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The name of this person is very complicated issue. Unilateral or bilateral changes are not good idea. As I already explained more than once, it is necessary to reach wider consensus. I am glad that you understood that it makes sense to say that George is more common than Gjergj. I hope that you now understand that it is really necessary to follow WP:BRD and restore pre-edit war name. All the best.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:29, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I am open for even more new evidence if presented. Contribution by other editors to this discussion is most welcomed. Khestwol (talk) 12:32, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It might be a good idea to initiate RfC and leave notices at relevant wp talkpages. The name of this person is connected to the name of his family and other members. Because of the consistency it is probably necessary to have centralized discussion about it. Previous discussions in the archives of this talkpage should be linked, as well as other talkpages, i.e. this discussion.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:38, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Descending order
Just for the record, per Google Ngram, here are the six common names in descending order:
 * 1) Skanderbeg
 * 2) George Castriot
 * 3) Gjergj Kastrioti
 * 4) George Castrioti
 * 5) George Kastrioti
 * 6) George Kastriot

What is it with these edits lately?
User:Bgwhite adding the pictures of Ferdinand and Alfonso V as well as the picture of the Battle of Albulena with the ridiculously long and redundant description is out of place.I will revert this and ask for that not to be done again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nixious6 (talk • contribs) 10:33, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Roman Catholic
Skanderbeg was obviously a Roman Catholic Christian. : "Although a highly successfuly military leader for the Turks, Skanderbeg deserted and returned to his Roman Catholic roots in Kruja to lead the Albanian resistance against his former lords." : "In 1443, at the same time the 41-year-old Kastrioti-Skanderbeg broke his political allegiance to the Ottomans, he renouncing the Turkish faith of Islam and reconverted to the Roman Catholic faith of his father." "Hoping that the Albanian general could provide some protection for the Catholic faith in Western Europe, Pope Eugenius IV also dreamed of beginning a new crusade against Islam, this time to be led by Kastrioti-Skanderbeg." Albanians, especially Ghegs, converted to Catholicism to resist the Slavs in the middle of the 13th century. (This is from a Wiki article). Skanderbeg was from north Albania and therefore was a Gheg. As well as this, Skanderbeg frequently asks for help from primarily Catholic nations in Italy, asked aid from the Pope, and was famous in Europe amongst Catholic states. I don't see why removing Roman Catholic makes anything more neutral, Antidiskrimiantor.Ujkrieger (talk) 15:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The first source you brought is Peter Lucas, "a verteran Boston political reporter and columnist" - not reliable
 * The second source is free internet encyclopedia - not reliable
 * Rest of three sources do not even refer to religion of Skanderbeg or Kastrioti family. You took them from wikipedia article where I added them.
 * Let me illustrate why this issue is not so simple:
 * What is the name of Roman Catholic monastery where Skanderbeg's father, whose religion Skanderbeg embraced, was burried?
 * Will you please translate words of Skanderbeg's father, whose religion Skanderbeg embraced (Ku është shpata, është feja)?
 * What is the name of Roman Catholic monastery where Skanderbeg's brother Repoš was burried?
 * What is the name of Roman Catholic monastery to which Skanderbeg's father, whose religion Skanderbeg embraced, presented two villages?
 * What is the name of Roman Catholic monastery where Skanderbeg's father, whose religion Skanderbeg embraced, bought four adelphates?
 * What is the name of Roman Catholic church in which Skanderbeg was married to Donika?
 * What is the name of Roman Catholic monastery where sister of Skanderbeg's wife was burried?
 * I replaced Category:Converts to Roman Catholicism from Islam with Category:Converts to Christianity from Islam because that is more neutral. There has been many discussions about what religion Skanderbeg embraced in November 1443 and the result is in FAQ on the top of this page. Please respect it and restore neutral category. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:42, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't see how the words of Skanderbeg's father and where his father brother was buried make Skanderbeg not a Catholic. Evidence that Skanderbeg embraced his father's religion? (after all, he was sent to Istanbul at a very young age) How is Skanderbeg's father being involved with the Orthodox Church even relevant at all? You are contradicting yourself, you just quoted him saying "Ku është shpata, është feja" meaning that Gjon wasn't a very religious person and would just act depending on who he was a vassal to at the time (in this case Orthodox Serbia). How is Donika's religion and Donika's sister's religion relevant to Skanderbeg? Your argument is quite weak, whilst I presented three sources (here's a fourth: ), you have presented none, just mentions of the people surrounding Skanderbeg. You cannot claim Skanderbeg is Orthodox without sources. All sources agree he was Christian, with some saying he was specifically Catholic. You should provide sources saying he was Orthodox in order to make a strong counter-argument. 95.145.57.148 (talk) 22:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * And one more thing, you forgot to mention the Church Skanderbeg was buried in, which seems to be Catholic (Lezha was Catholic, and | this source states that the Church in Lezha was a Catholic one). 95.145.57.148 (talk) 23:07, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Then please show me some sources to verify that Skanderbeg embraced Eastern Orthodoxy rather than Roman Catholicism.Nixious6 (talk) 18:21, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * What you wrote is logical fallacy which violates one of Ten Commandments of Rational Debate: "Thou shall not lay the burden of proof onto him who is questioning the claim. ("Burden of Proof Reversal")".--Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:12, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Skanderbeg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050217213517/http://frosina.org:80/about/infobits.asp?pf=1&id=134 to http://www.frosina.org/about/infobits.asp?pf=1&id=134
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090901145504/http://www.aodonline.org:80/NR/exeres/751B4426-7845-4911-A0CC-F83EB09EC140.htm to http://www.aodonline.org/NR/exeres/751B4426-7845-4911-A0CC-F83EB09EC140.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:56, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Irrelevant detailed description of other Balkan princes wars in the Legacy section
It is irrelevant the detailed description of other Balkan prices' battles and wars against Ottomans in the section of Skanderbeg's legacy with the objective of limiting his contribution and legacy towards the delay of Ottoman advance in Europe. MARSELIMADHE (talk) 12:34, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Please do not disguise your removal of sourced content. You have removed interesting and crucial information in the article body, then in the edit summary claimed to have only edited the legacy section.--Z oupan 12:54, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Tell me one interesting and crucial information I have removed. MARSELIMADHE (talk) 13:36, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The extent of rebellion, makeup of army, contemporary personal name spellings, geographic names, tribute to Ottomans, SS Skanderbeg.--Z oupan 13:48, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Irrelevant details of Slavic version of name
It is irrelevant to detail at the head of the name section how the name of Skanderbeg was written at some Slavic document. This is historic ignorance: The chancellories of princes always used to write (frequently simultaneously) in various languages, for example the documents of Gjon (John) Kastrioti at Hilandar monastery are written in Greek, Slavic and Latin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MARSELIMADHE (talk • contribs) 12:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC) MARSELIMADHE (talk) 12:31, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It is indeed relevant. Skanderbeg had undisputed Slavic descent, and the archaic/contemporary spelling of his name (in Slavic) is interesting because it does not mirror Gjergj, which is a modern form. Ignorance would be to remove it, as you did.--Z oupan 12:49, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Gjergj is not a modern form, as any historian could easily check at the legacy of Italian Arberesh folklore where the Gjergj form is used, not any other form, not even Giorgio as they live in Italy. I was mistaken, it was not ignorance to put the slavic form, it was intentional from you serbians in order to claim a slavic descendancy. Actually this claim is pure ignorance and narrow-minded, as all the world knows that he represents Albanians and their war. It would be the same if Albanians claim that Roman Emperors Constantine, Diocletian and Byzantine Justinian were Albanians, because of their illyrian origin, when the essential feature of their rule was being Roman emperors. Get a life!MARSELIMADHE (talk) 13:34, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Why would his partial Slavic descent prove a problem in his legacy??--Z oupan 13:43, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

There is not one evidence stating his slavic descent, so to the best is just an assumption. I agree fully regarding his mother's origin from Pollog and probably yes, she was Bulgarian origin, but this is such a minor irrelevant issue (same as the Epirus origin of Alexander the Great's mother, Olimpia) and there is no reason to put given that no ethnicity proof exists even though probable and the main theme was that he called in writing himself Dominus Albaniae, not what ethnic origin his mother might have had. Therefore, it is clearly some desperate try from desperate nationalists to claim some bit of other country's heroes. It is so SAD!MARSELIMADHE (talk) 13:58, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * , this part of the sentence needs elaboration: "In the contemporary Slavic chancellery in Albania," . What is meant by that considering there was no formal Albanian state but a collection of feudal entities that lingered together in a loose league of Lezha? Was the Slavic language (church Slavonic ? Serbian ? Bulgarian ? etc) a working language for one of these feudal entities (like Latin was, as the correspondences with Rome were in Latin - and was common for many medieval states and other polities whose people belonged to different ethnicites) in which a document was found bearing the name Djuradj ? Or was that document written in Slavic, one done by these feudal entities when they used such forms when they communicated with surrounding Slavic polities ? I ask this because the way the sentence is structured at the moment makes it problematic. It implies that a Slavic language was in use for Albania in general (or the only language) in such an official capacity. Some clarification and an inline would be good in that regard. Best.Resnjari (talk) 08:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * , some clarification is needed for the sentence. Current wording is problematic.Resnjari (talk) 21:05, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Skanderbeg's chancellery. --Z oupan 21:07, 25 August 2016 (UTC) The Slavic used in the chancelleries in Albania (the feudal entities). I'll look into if it's possible to find exact documents.--Z oupan  21:13, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Just place the inline/s and a few extra words that Church Slavonic ? Serbian, Bulgarian ? was a working language of one of these feudal entities (which one?, all?) etc. But sentence needs clarification. Best.Resnjari (talk) 21:17, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Skanderbeg was Serbian origin
The first scholarly claim that Scanderbeg was a Slav was made by Charles Hopf who misread a document of 1368 in Serbian. Through his misinterpretation he produced a "Branilo Kastrioti" which he put forth as Skanderbeg's great-grandfather. In spite of the clarification of this error by scholars, there are still Serbs today who believe in his existence. These Serbs give the below genealogy composed by various western genealogists as evidence.

Source: (assassinato a Jannina nel 1379 circa), di origine serba, Governatore di Jannina nel 1368. Sposa N.N.

The nationalist writers needed to do nothing more than provide [Skenderbeg] with a national significance and some embellishment, subjecting him to the laboratory that serves to transform history into myth. As with most myths, his figure and his deeds became a mixture of historical facts, truths and half-truths, inventions and folklore… For 19th century Albanians, a majority of whom had adhered to the faith of Skenderbeg’s Muslim enemies, the religious dimension needed to be avoided. Consequently, Skenderbeg became simply the national hero of all Albanians, the embodiment of the myth of ‘continuous resistance’ against their numerous foes over the centuries.

1) Skenderbeg is the great grandson of Branilo, the Serb duke of Kastoria. 2) Skenderbeg’s brother was named Stanisa, a contemporary Serbian name. 3) Stanisa’s son (Skenderbeg’s nephew) was also named Branilo. 4) Skenderbeg’s mother was Vojislava daughter of the Serb ruler of Polog 5) Skenderbeg’s sisters Valica and Jela mean ‘little wave’ and ‘dear’ in Serbian. Branilo and Stanisa are both Serbian names meaning ‘defender’ and ‘the one who stands,’ respectively. Note that neither Branilo, Stanisa, Valica nor Jela exist as Bulgarian names. Not long ago, for example, I wrote of myths and mentioned Skenderbeg and the Battle of Kosovo. I told of how the Albanians have forgotten that Skenderbeg was a Slav. I was attacked by Ismail Kadare, incensed at how I could possibly say that Skenderbeg was a Slav and that the history and culture of Albanians is on the level of Serbs.

That’s the way it is with our culture, which is mythomaniac, national-communist, romantic, self-glorifying. You can’t say anything objective without people getting angry. The Albanians are a people who still dream. That is what they are like in their conversations, their literature…In light of Hoxha and ‘pyramid schemes, Albanians are a people who still dream. That’s just the way they are… -Fatos Lubonja famous Albanian dissident there was an attempt in some circles to exalt the Albanians’ Muslim identity on the grounds that those Albanians who became Muslim were the only true Albanians – arguing that the Islamic religion was the strongest factor in the survival of the Albanians… Some even put forth the theory that Skenderbeg should not be the national hero because he betrayed the Turks by serving the Christians.…the old myths of national romanticism like that of Skenderbeg and ‘the religion of the Albanians is Albanianism’ remain the dominant mythologies in Albanian cultural and political life today.

-Fatos Lubonja Between the Glory of a Virtual World & the Misery of a Real World Quoted from: Albanian Identities: Myth and History Edited by: Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers & Bernd J. Fischer Page: 102

The nationalist writers needed to do nothing more than provide [Skenderbeg] with a national significance and some embellishment, subjecting him to the laboratory that serves to transform history into myth. As with most myths, his figure and his deeds became a mixture of historical facts, truths and half-truths, inventions and folklore… For 19th century Albanians, a majority of whom had adhered to the faith of Skenderbeg’s Muslim enemies, the religious dimension needed to be avoided. Consequently, Skenderbeg became simply the national hero of all Albanians, the embodiment of the myth of ‘continuous resistance’ against their numerous foes over the centuries.

Pirro Misha Invention of Nationalism: Myth and Amnesia Quoted from: Albanian Identities: Myth and History Edited by: Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers & Bernd J. Fischer Page: 43

According to Albanian Pirro Misha, Skenderbeg, as Albanians know him or think they know him, is nothing more than a myth: a mixture of historical facts, truths and half-truths, inventions and folklore… The Albanian nationalist elites have turned Skenderbeg into the basis for the myth of ‘continuous resistance’. In fact, there was no ‘continuous resistance’ by the Albanians. There is only the betrayal of Skenderbeg by their conversion to the faith of Skenderbeg’s Muslim enemies. The religious dimension needed to be avoided to serve a basis for control of the Christian Albanians by the Muslim Albanian nationalist elites. Skenderbeg’s identity was completely hijacked and along with it, Albanian Christianity.

In Part 1 of Project Perpjekja, there was much discussion about Albanian nationalist elites. One more thing should be observed: the Albanian nationalist elites are always, almost as a rule, Muslim or ‘ex-Muslim.’ The Prizrenites were all Muslims and so was the Enverist ruling circle (Enver Hoxha, Mehmet Shehu, Qemal Stafa, Ramiz Alija, Ismail Kadare); so are the KLA. These nationalist elites have caused Albanians a lot of suffering. Zogu took up the spirit of the League of Prizren and he robbed the country; the Enverists did their damage through cultural isolation, the KLA have turned ‘free’ Kosovo into a cesspool of AIDS and prostitution.

Fatos Lubonja, another insider into the Albanian academic scene, describes how elements of Skenderbeg’s biography were manipulated by the Albanian nationalist elites:

His sisters: Mara Jela Angelina Vlajica and his brothers were: Stanisa Konstantin

“Skenderbeg’s family was of Serb descent” and married to Danica daughter of Vojvoda Golem. (golem is an old Slav word, meaning “great”.)

L. Defenbah “Zeine Familie War Slavishen Ursprungs” Brlin, Germany 1895

Skenderbeg’s sister Mara was married to Stefan Crnojevic, lord of Zeta, who with the Zetans helped Skenderbeg for 24 years in the wars against the Turks. According to the Catholic priest of Shkodra Marin Barleci, the Turks unearhed Skenderbeg’s remains and distributed them amongst themsleves ‘as souveniers’.

Paul Rovinski Russian emmisary and historian quoted from: “Glas Crnogorca” 1899

The Catholic Albanian priest Marini Barleci says that Skenderbeg wore Serb clothing and wrote in ‘Serb letters and Italian language’ because the illiterate Albanians at that time could only write in Greek or Serb just as Skenderbeg “carried all discussions in the Serb language”.

Kacic Miosic (Croatian scribe) 17th Century

“Skenderbeg, a personally brave man was of Serb descent and was so useful, that he was respected by the Albanians, as well. He was the son of Ivan Kastrioti. His mother was Vojislava, daughter of the Prince of Polog”

Teodoro Spanduci 16th century Italian quoted by: P. Rovinski see: above source for Mr. Rovinski

Sources: Biography of Skenderbeg in Serbian language published in Budapest in 1828 by a Hungarian: Josip Milovuk

Biography of Skenderbeg in Serbian language published in Belgrade in 1848 by a Croatian: Andrija Kacic Miosic

Biography of Skenderbeg in Serbian language published in Novi Sad in 1855 by the Serb Popovic brothers

The only book about Skenderbeg written by an Albanian before the World War I was written by Catholic Albanian priest Marin Barleci who is quoted by Paul Rovinski. As shown above – even M. Barleci an Albanian designates Skenderbeg a a Serb and not an Albanian at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DereticevSvetiVazal (talk • contribs) 11:14, 27 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your detailed explanation and I apologise for my late response. I removed it because such a claim should have the sources supporting it included in the article. I think the best may be to copy this entire thread to the Talk:Skanderbeg and see there the opinion of other editors. FkpCascais (talk) 02:20, 29 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I read through DereticevSvetiVazal citing of sources above, apart from some of the personal POV included in those comments. Though those sources are interesting they have a few issues. One many of them are obsolete as the scholarship on Skanderbeg has moved on in a contemporary era (i.e Schmitt). Secondly the other sources citing Misha, Lubonja etc deal with the myth making of Skanderbeg which has nothing to with Skanderbeg's partial Slavic descent, but about how the modern day communists used Skanderbeg as a figure to implement their version of Albanian identity among Albania's religious communities who are Albanian speaking. If you want to place stuff about Lubonja and Misha etc, there is a page on the Myth of Skanderbeg already in Wikipedia that deals with such stuff. Best.Resnjari (talk) 20:43, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

FAQ
I do not think that the FAQ mirrors the frequent questions and the right answers. Could someone with a good overview take a look and edit the template accordingly?--Z oupan 02:09, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * "Skanderbeg was born in what is Albania today." - That is incorrect. All sources explain that exact birthplace is unknown. What is know he was born in the realm of his father. Its territory was in region of Debar, along the border between modern-day Macedonia and Albania. Exact place is unknown. It might be in Albania or Macedonia. That is also what article says.
 * "Skanderbeg's native language was albanian" - That is incorrect. There is an ocean of sources that his father, grandfather and great grandfather were of Slavic origin, while Slavic origin of his mother is undisputed by reliable contemporary scholars. The region in which he was born was populated by substantial Slavic population. He probably learned to speak Albanian and many other languages too, but emphasizing that Albanian was his native language would be incorrect.
 * "From where was Skanderbeg's mother? Controversial..." - That is also incorrect. No reliable sources dispute that she was from Polog, which is also what article says.
 * "Was Skanderbeg a Roman Catholic?" - No precise answer is provided. The question and answer do not mention Orthodoxy, only Islam and Catholicism. Also, the question itself is a little loaded. Skanderbeg was probably tempted to convert to Catholicism in some period of his life. That does not mean that he was not Orthodox in another part of his life. The question should be reworded to: "Was Skanderbeg a Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox?" The reply should clarify that it is unknown whether he was Catholic of Orthodox, before and after he was Muslim. It should also explain that, taking in consideration real events, he probably was both in different period of his life.
 * "His real name was Gjergj (George) Kastrioti. His father was Gjon Kastrioti and his mother was Voisava Tripalda" - That is incorrect. If real name means name he used for himself, the real name of Skanderbeg was not Albanian version (Gjergj) or English version name (George). That is not how he wrote his name. No primary source refers to him as Gjergj or George or to his father as Gjon.
 * It is necessary to reach consensus before the template is changed.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:33, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Support change. I would also have the questions narrowed to 1. [Ethnicity, family], 2. [Religion], 3. [Name].--Z oupan 00:15, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose change.Points 2 and 3 are your personal views as there is no consensus between historians that any ancestor of Skanderbeg was of Slavic origin.The last point about his real name needs to be discussed.NobleFrog (talk) 19:06, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting position. Points 2 and 3 should not be changed or even discussed because what I wrote about them are my personal views? What I wrote is supported with an ocean of sources. I can present them if you want? What about what you wrote? Can you present reliable sources which support:
 * Albanian ethnicity of Skanderbeg and all of his ancestors is undisputed by contemporary scholarly sources so Skanderbeg's native language was certainly Albanian
 * Skanderbeg's mother was not from Polog.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:03, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose change. Make sure a good consensus is reached before changing anything here.
 * Ethnicity: His mother was Tripalda. Does that make her automatically Slavic? His words make a very clear statement (letter to Giovani Antonio, Prince of Taranto) You call the Albanese shepherds. You don't know anything about my race. Our forefathers were called Epirotes, from where Pyrrhus came who won the Romans.....Our ancestors went as far as India with Aleksander the Great and defeated those people with many difficulties. From these descent those people which you call "shepherds"....etc,etc.... I guess that counts for something.
 * Religion. His family was clearly Orthodox. He was initiated Bektashi when he joined the Janissaries. Then he came in Albania and killed all the Muslims. Did he consider himself Catholic later? Still Orthodox? Pan-Christian? This is matter of interpretation and it is not easy.
 * Name. So how do we put the name? Ivan, Johan, Johannes? Giovanni? It depends on what language you write it. Since this is English wikipedia, and the person was Albanian, having Gjergj or George is not wrong.
 * Mondiad (talk) 16:29, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Regarding his mother Voisava's origins it should be left on the article about her which it is covered about her Bulgarian and Serbian origins. However Mondiad has identified two gaps that need to be referenced in this article regarding Skanderbeg's religion. He was born Orthodox. And also that he was Bektashi in the Janissaries. I anyone has a copy of Schmitt or another peer reviewed scholar/s on them at the moment could they do it ?Resnjari (talk) 16:34, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Ahah so now he is of Slavic origin ahahahah man get a life. Wonder why albanians say serbs have no honor and no principles.


 * The recent book by German academic Oliver Jens Schmit is the most researched and non-biased scholarship to date on Skanderbeg and has annoyed many an Albanian nationalist. Regarding point 3 there are disputes about that. I concur with Schmitt however that Skanderbeg was of Slav heritage from his mother's side (In the medieval era people were cementing alliances all over place), however other historians have disagreed. About point 1, most of Gjon's domains where in what is Albania today and the small village that Skanderbeg possible could have been born in is in what is now Albania and not in another state. About point 2 when you say " That is incorrect. There is an ocean of sources that his father, grandfather and great grandfather were of Slavic origin" you will find strong disagreement there. Moreover those sources (which for one you do not name) of which you speak, when were they written (if its scholarship during the Miloseviċ era, that is very problematic to say the least) and also are they based on in depth archival research also ?. Schmitt does not say any such thing about that ! Regarding 4 "Was Skanderbeg a Roman Catholic?" - No precise answer is provided." He was a Catholic later in life. His father was Orthodox. Almost all Albanians where Orthodox at that point in time. Roman Catholicism made inroads in the north under the Avengians, it was still ongoing during Skanderbeg's time. Regarding point 5 "His real name was Gjergj (George) Kastrioti. His father was Gjon Kastrioti and his mother was Voisava Tripalda" - That is incorrect. If real name means name he used for himself", there are numerous issues there. For one the Albanian from is attested through Italian (Venetian and Papal) documents which give his name also as Zorzi, a corruption of the Albanian Gjergj. The Gj consonants being interpreted as Z. Two Skanderbeg was referred to as George in various versions of his name and at times signed off in the Latin form of that name (as Latin was an international language and many people used a Latin version of their name during the era). As for the English version, this is English Wikipedia after all and the version of his name most used in that language when discussing him. The Arberesh where Skanderbeg's memory is best preserved also refer to him as Gjergj and not something else. Skanderbeg as surrounded by Albanian speakers such as his friend and confidant Pal Engelli (who wrote some of the first examples of Albanian we have today). There no record of Skanderbeg however not having spoken Albanian.Resnjari (talk) 12:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I can't believe it is seriously being discussed whether or not Skanderbeg was a Slav. *sigh* The vast majority of sources accept he was an Albanian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.60.158 (talk) 20:54, 17 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Skanderbeg himself as not a Slav and did not identify as such (as it shows in documents he signed himself of as Lord of Albania, not Serbia or Bulgaria). Peer reviewed scholarship only refers to his mother. That is covered in the article about Vojsava. Descent does not make a person Albanian, otherwise one could say that the Arvanites are Albanian today. Or other examples would be Turkish sultans with a Greek mother. One would never call Mehmet the conquer of Constantinople a "Greek" on account of his mother's ethncity etc, etc.Resnjari (talk) 21:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The FAQ needs a redesign.--Z oupan 23:24, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The argument "it shows in documents he signed himself of as Lord of Albania, not Serbia or Bulgaria" is invalid because obviously the place he rules doesn't make him belonging to the majority ethnic group of the land he is ruling. He coudn't rule Serbia or Bulgaria because at time these were strong regional powers ruled by other rulers, but that doesn't invalidade a possibility of a non-Albanian ruling Albania. Actually, during Middle Ages big portions of Albania was often ruled by Serbs. So a Serb could very possibly write himself as ruler of Albania, thus making the argument useless for the issue here. FkpCascais (talk) 18:39, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The argument that "He coudn't rule Serbia or Bulgaria because at time these were strong regional powers ruled by other rulers, but that doesn't invalidade a possibility of a non-Albanian ruling Albania. Actually, during Middle Ages big portions of Albania was often ruled by Serbs" is going into OR territory. At the time of Skanderbeg's era, even amongst the scholarship the feudal lords who ruled areas of Albania where regarded as Albanians as by then they had come into their own as the Slavic Empire around them has disintegrated into small entities ((and often being vassals of the Ottomans). In the medieval era, many rulers have parentage from different ethnicity. A case in point would we Mehmet the conqueror of Istanbul who had a Greek mother but never himself regarded himself as as a Romioi or Byzantine Greek. In England many of the nobility had French Norman mothers. It was part of securing and gaining alliances. How the child was reared by their father often determined how they thought of themselves as that is the polity they usually became politically active in. Moreover Skanderbeg went to live at the Sultan's court from a young age and was raised a Muslim. His return to what is now Albania, he renounced Islam, became a Christian again. It was in' Albania that remade himself and regarded himself the lord of a larger area that was thought of as constituting Albania (not just being a lard of Kruja) than just a feudal polity here or there. The concept of a consolidated Albanian state only came into proper being in 1912. Within the scholarship an Albanian state existing at that of the medavil era was non-existent. Unless Schmit who has written the most recent and non-biased study of Skanderbeg states this outright that Skanderbeg regarded himself as of Slavic heritage etc then this can be changed. For a change to happen strong peer reviewed scholarship must be provided (i.e Schmitt).Resnjari (talk) 20:36, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I was just saying that your insinuation that because he signed as ruler of Albania he must be Albanian was, actually you reminded me of it, WP:OR. I am not saying Skenderbeg wasn't Albanian, just saying that he signing as Lord of Albania provides nos answers to the question of his ethnicity or nationality. FkpCascais (talk) 22:47, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I thought i would clarify the issue on my part in a second reply. The main reason why included the Lord of Albania thing is because even though there was no Albanian state per se (instead a loose coalition of feudal polities grouped around a League of Lezha), Skanderbeg thought of himself as something related to a concept of Albania at the very least, not with a Serbia or Bulgaria etc. To date in the most peer reviewed recent scholarship there is nothing to assert that Skanderbeg was not Albanian. His mother's ancestry has no bearing to what he was. Otherwise Mehmet the conquer would be "Greek" and much of the English nobility of the time would be "French" due to having mothers of a differing ancestry. Mehmet is regarded as Turkish and members the English nobility as English. Those wanting to change this bit that Skanderbeg was "Serbian" etc are basing it on such a thing of his mother's descent. It is only his mother of whom the scholarship refers to being of Slavic descent, not his father. Best.Resnjari (talk) 00:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Better source than Kenneth Setton?
With this edit (diff) tagged Kenneth Setton with better source tag. I think that Kenneth Setton is among the best sources used in the article and if no other more recent scholarly source of exceptional quality does not contradict what Setton stated, tagging Setton with better source needed tag is not appropriate and should be removed. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:26, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

That is your opinion. However this is a bold claim for a secondary source and is not mentioned in pretty much anything else. That's why I find the claim dubious. Euripides ψ (talk) 21:32, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Incorrect . The assertion in question is mentioned in multiple primary sources cited by Setton, many of them even quote in the text of his work cited in this case. Please revert yourself and remove the tag. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:14, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Interesting. I checked the source and there was no mention of such a thing. Euripides ψ (talk) 22:18, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * , if you really have checked the source (which is available in full text on GB) you would certainly see on page 282 the text which support cited assertion, also with inline quote saying: "....In jeering tone he said the other day to a cardinal that he would rather make a war on the Church than on the Turk" plus citation (ref 43) to source about the letter written by Lorenzo da Pesaro and published in original primary documents collection authored by Pall, even with citation in Latin or Italian "... elo beffando disse l'altro di a uno cardinale che nante voria farre guerra alla ghiesa che al Turco!". --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:35, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Setton is a good source but the way how sentence is written in article is POV. Setton doesn't clarify if assertion of da Pessaro was what really Skanderbeg has said or just what da Pessaro believed Skanderbeg has said. All what is needed is to clarify that reader is reading what da Pessaro claimed. Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:56, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Here's the book. On page 282 nothing like that is written. Maybe there's a mistake in the citation? Euripides ψ (talk) 21:51, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Your link doesn't send to page 282 but to page 258 Euripides ψ Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:55, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Then scroll down to page 282. Maybe template: should be used? Euripides ψ (talk) 21:56, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Here it is; there are two different books, The Papacy and the Levant, 1204-1571: The Fifteenth Century (which is where I found it) and The Papacy and the Levant, 1204-1571: The thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, which does not contain it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:35, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * That is correct. It was 1976 not 1978 work of Setton. Thanks Dianna for removing better source tag. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:51, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for clearing that up Diannaa. I checked the source that was in the article but looks like that was the problem. Euripides ψ (talk) 14:38, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Skanderbeg's flag
According to whom was Skanderbeg's flag red with a black eagle, flown at Kruja? It seems like a myth. Could you guys please check into that?--Z oupan 20:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

According to Kristo Frasheri.In Gjergj Kastrioti Skënderbeu: jeta dhe vepra (1405-1468) in page 212 he states that he raised said standard and it was in such colors. Ottfried Neubecker writes in The Flag Bulletin, Volume 26  "History records that the 15th century Albanian national hero, Skanderbeg (i.e. George Kastriota), had raised the red flag with the black eagle over his ancestral home, the Fortress of Kruje" Plus it's mentioned in:


 * Gjergj Kastrioti Skenderbeg (1405-1468) is Albania's national hero. The Skenderbeg family crest, the black double-headed eagle on red background, became the symbol of the Albanian nationalist movement


 * Gjergj Kastrioti Skenderbeg. His 25-year revolt (from 1443 until his death in 1468) delayed the subjugation of Albania, and his red flag with a black double-headed eagle has remained the symbol of Albanian national liberation.

You asked this over at Talk:kastrioti as well and fueled an edit war. Now you question it here as well. Do you believe the eagle was white with a red background? Euripides ψ (talk) 12:09, 28 August 2016 (UTC)


 * No, but I still want to know if this is a myth or historical fact.--Z oupan 23:04, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

So, Kohen says that Skanderbeg set up his banner at Kruja, but nothing about the red background. The Armorials used a yellow background for the Kastrioti, except the Fojnica Armorial. Did Neubecker (1987) and Frasheri (1962) cite the claim? Neubecker's "over his ancestral home" is factually false, btw.--Z oupan 23:04, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * It is necessary to see the original text of Barleti who allegedly first mentioned some flag of Skanderbeg. There was extensive discussion about this issue here. There is also a COA which description can be found:
 * in the sources presented here. Its representation can be found here on Heraldique Euroeenne and on hu.wiki
 * and in this work .--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:11, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * and in this work .--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:11, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * and in this work .--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:11, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

I would like to ask of Zoupan to remove the WP:NOTRS tag. Many reliable sources refer to the Kastrioti's crest as being a black double headed eagle with a red background. I don't see why it should be so controversial. Euripides ψ (talk) 15:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

"Albanian resistance" header
I do not see why you had to remove the "Albanian Resistance" heading.Everybody agreed on the sectioning and it stayed like that for years.I would have nothing against expanding it but,something like this seems illogical as "Albanian Resistance" encompasses his activity from 1444-1468 quite well.Can you explain your edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Euripides ψ (talk • contribs) 22:01, 13 March 2016 (UTC) Moved from my talk page.--Z oupan 22:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Where is this agreed upon? I think it is illogical to put three sections in their own right under a section named "Albanian resistance", when they all deal with Skanderbeg and not this overall "Albanian resistance". They are independent and long enough.--Z oupan 22:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

The header "Rise","Consolidation" and "Last Years" is misleading as the reader may not be aware of the events.Therefore sub-headers are perfectly usable in this case.I do not understand why it irritates you so much.IS it due to the fact that Skanderbeg's followers included Slavs,Greeks and Italians?They were a minority and most of his followers were Albanian.If we follow your logic,many wars ought to have their names changed. Euripides ψ (talk) 22:27, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see them as misleading, but a proper summarization would be better (as the previous section). What would be misleading is to treat his rise as the "rise of Albanian resistance", and his last years as the "last years of Albanian resistance", which is the case now. I am not irritated (?), I am merely raising an issue. The thing is that the article is not about wars, but about Skanderbeg. The next step would be to trim the article; branching is needed as to avoid going into too much detail.--Z oupan 23:04, 13 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I am against using "Albanian Resistance" as subtitle because it does not correspond to sources. Skanderbeg's uprising was not a resistance of people of Albanian ethnicity, nor it was limited to Albania. Most of his major battles occurred in Macedonia, his realm was initiated in Macedonia (Debar) and included Svetigrad (Kodzadzik) and Modrič in Macedonia. As explained in the article, and cited with reliable sources (Oliver Schmitt, Franz Babinger...) his followers included many Slavs, Italians, Frenchmen and Germans. This was not "Albanian resistance" also because there were Albanians on both sides. "The military commanders, leaders and simple soldiers, i.e. the whole army fighting against Scanderbeg, consisted of local Albanians, Bulgarians, Serbs and Vlachs. There were also Turkish Muslims in the Ottoman forces who owned timar lands. On the whole, it is evident that the rebels were not opposed by “foreign” invaders, but by local forces loyal to the new empire who were willing to fight members of their own ethnic groups longing for pre-Ottoman times. " Robert Elsie (awarded for his Albanophilia selected from Oliver Schmitt book)---Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:10, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Antidisrkiminator,

Following your logic should we change the name of the Croatian War of Independence article because there were combatants of other ethnicities as well?Should we change the name of the article because quite some battles took place in Bosnia?I understand you as a Serb want to display your people's importance in this conflict as you've tried before,even going to an extreme.

I believe "Albanian Resistance" is perfectly suitable.Here are some reliable sources that use the term "Albanian"


 * 1) ..Hunyadi had not been able to wait for Scanderbeg and the Albanians, for the advance of Murad II........ Second battle of Kosovo 1448.
 * 2) Scanderbeg was still to enact the great Albanian epic resistance to the Turks... Albanian resistance to Turks.
 * 3) ...Albanian leader.. or another ..the Albanian athlete and champion... Referring to Scanderbeg (several times)
 * 4) .....Albanian army including Catalans contingent sent by Alfonso...Albanian defeat at Berat... Battle of Berat 1455 (bear in mind that the catalan contingent has been mentioned in the article)
 * 5) ...(Scanderbeg) sent an Albanian cavalry force into southern Italy.. or another expression ...Albanian expeditions.. Scanderbeg expedition in Italy 1460-61
 * 6) ...Elbasan soon proved its worth by resisting an Albanian attack the following spring.... Scanderbeg attack on Elbasan in 1466, the Scanderbeg is not even mentioned but just his "Albanian army"
 * 7) ....great Albanian fortress of Kruja... Terms used for localities.

Or ''The Late Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Late Twelfth Century By John Van Antwerp Fine Edition reprint, illustrated Publisher University of Michigan Press, 1994 ISBN 0472082604, 9780472082605''


 * 1) Albanians defeating the invaders in June 1444...Albanians victory over the Turks....the two armies met on the Drin at some point in 1448, and the Albanians annihilated the Venetian force
 * 2) In 1452 the Albanians defeated in the mountains a new Ottoman force
 * 3) Commander of the Albanian army.......Albanian leader

So,just because Skanderbeg's army included a minority of slavs doesn't mean the whole name of his resistance be changed,therefore I think the term "Albanian resistance" is thoroughly usable. Euripides ψ (talk) 21:58, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You are very confused. The issue is the name of a section header, not the name of an article. The issue is terminology, not ethnicities. Basically what you've done here is to search for "Scanderbeg"+"Albanians" to prove something. Do these ref-quotes somehow support the section header? I don't think so.--Z oupan 22:38, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Per MOS:SECTIONS and WP:AT: "The title indicates what the article [section in this case] is about...."
 * Is section titled "Albanian resistance" about the resistance of Albanians? Yes, but only partially because:
 * As demonym, Skanderbeg's followers who resisted to Ottomans were not only Albanians but also Macedonians. Except Kruje, almost all other major populated places under Skanderbeg's control were in Macedonia (predominantly Slavic populated Debar, Svetigrad, Modric...).
 * In the ethnic sense, Skanderbeg's followers were a mixture of all ethnicities present in that region at that time. In many cases, Skanderbeg's forces were composed predominantly or even exclusively of Slavs, i.e. in the case of Slavic populated Svetigrad in Macedonia. After Ottomans captured Svetigrad, its Slavic population emigrated to the small fortress of Kruje and continued to resist Ottomans for many years to follow. Eventually, Ottoman armies (with the substantial share of Albanians) captured it. The resistance of this Slavic people from Macedonia to Ottoman forces was certainly not "Albanian resistance".
 * Maybe the only clear reason in support of "Albanian resistance" subtitle lays in the fact that the Ottoman forces who resisted to Skanderbeg included a majority of Albanians, so their resistance to Skanderbeg was indeed predominantly "Albanian resistance".
 * Albanians were actually Skanderbeg's main victims. Skanderbeg was responsible for the death of more Albanians than any other person in history. I began a draft of an article with list of his battles, but when I saw such huge number of Albanians who died because of Skanderbeg only in first 5 years of his rebellion, I simply could not continue with this draft ..... The figures are shocking.
 * The section in question is not only about Albanian resistance to Skanderbeg or to Ottomans. It is also about Skanderbeg's struggle against Venetians, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Angevins, ....
 * To conclude, "Albanian resistance" as section title is incorrect simplification which is against MOS:SECTIONS. The same is valid for "Rise" and "consolidation" subtitles which are unsourced WP:OR that does not correspond to the sourced events described in the text of the article. Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:08, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * No consensus was reached whatsoever.I clearly gave my argument and listed all the sources that used the term Albanian for his resistance yet you do not agree with it and give me some poor arguments.If you want to tell me it cannot be called "Albanian Resistance" due to the fact that there was a minority of slavs or vlachs or greeks or whatever in his army then why don't we change the "Croatian war of independence" title due to the minority of Bosnians or Albanians etc.I still do not understand what your problem is with this heading if nobody changed it for years,you suddenly find it problematic. Euripides ψ (talk) 13:07, 2 April 2016 (UTC) —moved from talk page.--Z oupan 17:44, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Clearly, there is concensus.--Z oupan 17:44, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No there isn't.I do not agree with changing the header and adding a main article template to a terribly POV and ridiculously made page.We cane argue about the template later but for now there is no mutual agreement for the header. Euripides ψ (talk) 17:50, 2 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Euripides, Skanderbeg's resistance contained other ethnicities too. Obviously, Albanians formed a sizable portion of that and considering that the refugees who fled to Italy and kept his memory alive where Albanians, not Slavs or others. However the region of Diber/Debar was a borderland and of mixed ethnicity where Albanians, Slavs and Vlachs lived etc. No need to pursue this with making it a Albanian resistance thing. One must be aware that the communist regime created a myth of Skanderbeg to as to downplay the heritage of autochthonous or indigenous Balkan Islam and historical links with the Ottomans which most Muslim Albanians are still sentimental about though no longer say because Albanian nationalism has made it "taboo" due to its Turkophobia and Islamophobia. This Skanderbeg figure, though important for some (and now days all Albanians) was just a minor warlord up north who was considered a nuisance by some of his contemporaries and considering Schmitt and Elsie both state that there were locals who fought against him, not all even in his family like Hamza agreed with his cause. Seriously this article is fine as it is regarding that bit. No need to put a modernist take on this medieval past. Best.Resnjari (talk) 18:14, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

It is irrelevant the detailed description of other Balkan prices' battles and wars against Ottomans in the section of Skanderbeg's legacy with the objective of limiting his contribution and legacy towards the delay of Ottoman advance in Europe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MARSELIMADHE (talk • contribs) 12:24, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Resnjari that is your opinion. Robert Elsie is a scholar who specializes in Albanian literature and folklore. Not medieval history. Following your POV, the Ottomans never actually bothered to send soldiers from Anatolia right? When they warred with Serbia, Bosnia, Hungary etc. All their forces were locals? I disagree. And also, Skanderbeg forced the Sultans themselves to conduct campaigns personally against him, which all failed. Also I believe that "Turkophobia" and "Islamophobia" has no place here. You can discuss that somewhere else. Best Euripides ψ (talk) 16:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Elsie published work of Austrian academic Oliver Schmitt who is specialized in medieval history - link.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:02, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * , my point is that the construct of Skanderbeg's rebellion as being an Albanian one dates back to communist times and is rooted in national identity issues and downplaying Islam. Of course the bulk of troops were Anatolian, but they included sizable numbers of Balkan locals, such as Skanderbeg's nephew Hamza. In 20th century Balkan historiography there has been a tendency to make certain medaveil heroes and battles the preserve on one nationality or the other. Another example of this type is the battle of Kosovo where alongside Serbian forces, troops and their feudal lords from many other nationalities participated, yet the battle for Serbs is considered Serb only with the Ottomans omitting the others. There has been much deconstruction of that myth over time (though not so much in Serbia itself). We should not replicate such myth making here. Skanderbeg is only now being treated outside this scope such as Schmitt's work. Best.Resnjari (talk) 06:16, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Resnjari, what you are talking about is not a problem in this article. You can discuss that in the Myth of Skanderbeg article. All Albanian sources used here are very reliable. Fan Noli graduated from Harvard. Kristo Frasheri is an excellent historian who has a neutral point of view and is very qualified in his field. He wasn't influenced by the communists at all. Also I don't understand why you are mentioning this downplay of Islam constantly. That isn't an issue in this article either.I do think the article has a few issues left and with a little work I intend to nominate it for GA. Euripides ψ (talk) 11:03, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The subtitle issue has been resolved by renaming "Albanian resistance" to "Rebellion against the Ottomans". That was only to top of the iceberg. The article still presents mythologized and nationalized (more precisely - Albanized) version of Skanderbeg, his struggle, his soldiers and the territory they controlled.
 * Re sources, the sources used in this article include:
 * 13 citations by Francione (a writer also worked as an actor and director, theater, essayist and painter who is from the artistic point of view influenced by Hacker Art, art, Gothic Revival and the so-called cyber-culture)
 * Kristo Frasheri who belongs to numerous nationalist historians from Albania who intentionally emphasized "the Turkish savagery" and "heroic Christian resistance against the Osmanli state in Albania" (:" Albanian nationalist historians like Ramadan Marmallaku, Kristo Frasheri, Skender Anamali, Stefanaq Pollo, Skender Rizaj and Arben Puto in their books deliberately emphasized "the Turkish savagery" and "heroic Christian resistance against the Osmanli state in Albania")
 * Harry Hodgkinson has 17 citations (a British writer, journalist, naval intelligence officer and expert on the Balkans who suddenly, when he was 86 years old, decided to write his first work about medieval history after he was appointed from 1985 to be a Chairman of the Anglo-Albanian Association and during his career supported the Albanian cause and took up strong anti-Serb and anti-Bulgarian positions).
 * etc...
 * Re GA nomination. There were two GA reviews and during those reviews it was pointed to many issues of this article which remained unresolved. I would be happy to collaborate with any interested editor to improve its quality to GA status. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:03, 17 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I have no issue with Fan Noli. However since Fan Noli, other historians have written on the subject which has made some of his research obsolete (he only worked with what was available to him at that point in time), others who don't come from the Balkans have written about the issue since then. Schmitt is the most recent and by far without bias. I will also place the whole Kopanski quote that Antidiskriminator has cited in part as then you will get the jist of what i mean (p.192)
 * "The sophisticated culture, literature and art of Islam were ignored by the generality of historians who hardly even tried to conceal their anti-Muslim bias. Their ferociously anti-Islamic and anti-Turkish attitude not only obscured and distorted the amazing process of mass conversion of entire Christian communities to Islam, but also provided an intellectual prop for the ultra nationalist policy of ethnic and religious cleansing in Bosnia, Hum (Herzegovina), Albania, Bulgaria and Greece. For against the backdrop of the history of the Balkans, as generally portrayed, what appeared as a kind of historical exoneration and an act of retaliation for the 'betrayal' of Christianity in the Middle Ages. The policy of destroying Islamic culture and way of life in Albania after the World War II is the primary reason why the history of medieval Islam in this land has not been properly studied. And when it was studied, it was studied within the parameters of the Stalinist ideology which emphasized only the mythical image of medieval Albanians as the 'heroic Illyrian proletariat'. The handful of Muslim scholars in the Communist Eastern Europe who resisted the anti-Islamic and anti-Turkish propaganda were ostracized and often penalized. Albanian nationalist historians like Ramadan Marmallaku, Kristo Frashëri Skender Anamali, Stefanaq Pollo, Skender Rizaj and Arben Puto in their books deliberately emphasized ad nauseam only 'the Turkish savagery' and the 'heroic' Christian resistance against the Osmanli state in Albania."
 * From when Kopanski wrote in 1997, things have moved on and there are multiple sources out there and yes they treat the Ottoman era for the good, bad and ugly stuff that happened. However Albanian historians writing about Skanderbeg had a nationalist, Islamophobic and Turkophobic bent to their work and many still do instead of just having the sources tell the history. It was they who also crafted the image of Skanderbeg's rebellions as "Albanian only" which is false and based on nationalism. Caution needs to be exercised on some sources just like when one uses Serbian scholars and Greek ones too when in reference to the Ottoman period and Muslim populations due to their nationalist tones. This can go to a GA in the not to distant future as it has improved much from what this article was before. Best.Resnjari (talk) 12:48, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I understand what you mean but I don't think one source like that can confirm such a claim. I never said The rebellion was fully Albanian. Skanderbeg obviously had partial support from Venice. One of his allies was the Serbian lord of Zeta Stefan Crnojevic. He had financial assistance from the Kingdom of Naples and the Papacy. But you are discrediting historians simply for being educated in communist times. Kristo Frasheri, Selami Pulaha etc are relatively good and neutral sources. And you seem to discredit all Albanian sources, simply for being Albanian. Now I think Schmitt is a good source, but recently I've been reading Setton and think he is better. Him and Babinger. Now to the anti-Ottomanism and Turkophobia you are mentioning. While it is true there are many authors who have such sentiments, the ones listed in the article don't. "The Good, the bad and the ugly", obviously, the "bad" which may encompass massacres such as the one ordered by Mehmed II during his campaign against Skanderbeg and after his death should be mentioned in the article. The "good" should also be mentioned whatever they are, but I don't see any worthy of mention in this period. There is an article called Ottoman Albania which is about Albania under Ottoman rule from medieval times until 1912 where the "good, bad and ugly" should be fully detailed. However, I am really interested in what you think should be done in order to nominate this article for GA. Please reply to me in my talk page. Euripides ψ (talk) 13:17, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
 * No. There is Talk page guidelines which says:
 * "The purpose of an article's talk page (accessible via the talk or discussion tab) is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page." - so any discussion about changes to this article necessary for its GA status should take place here, not on your talkpage.
 * "Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views on a subject." Both editors who discussed sources presented sources in which their positions are grounded. You presented your personal views. Please take in consideration Talk page guidelines in future. All the best.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:35, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
 * , the main issue with calling it Albanian resistance is that is asserts that the resistance given to incoming Ottoman armies was one based on a national platform. Skanderbeg though considered himself lord of Albania, his cause was one about championing Christianity first and foremost. To ascribe a modernist take through a national lens on the resistance as being Albanian resistance is one that those Albanian historians did under the communists, while omitting that others also partook in it or that the main motivation was about it being Christian resistance. Kopanski did an overview of them and that what his conclusion was of their work. Enver was more into peddlgin a certian view and wanted everyone to adhere to it (for more see: Arshi Pipa The Politics of Language in Socialist Albania (1989) ). That's why its best to be cautious and or refrain from that. Yes there is, Setton, Babinger and Frasheri is not big a issue like a few other Albanian historians. However Scmitt is the most recent of all the scholars and one who has done an overview of both the primary and secondary literature relating to Skanderbeg and has been vouched for by others. Hence he takes precedence in this area. As for other stuff relating to the Ottomans scorch earth stuff, yeah add it. It happened and the defters in the aftermath of this era many areas up north where depopulated and devastated. We need a sentence on the formation of the Arberesh too (as per Nasse), considering their formation as a community in southern Italy is due to Skanderbeg and the conflict with the Ottomans. I can only assist with parts of the article, not all as the military encounters are a little bit out of my depth. Stuff on religious allegiance of Skanderbeg, ancestry, legacy and stuff like that i can, etc. Best.Resnjari (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@Resnjari..First you talk about autochthonous Islam in the Balkans and Albania, then you assert Skanderbeg's resistance was primarly of a Christian'' nature? What's your point? Don't you think these absurdities based on no historical records should be left out of the historical discourse being these clearly your POV? The communists didn't create the myth of Scanderbeg, this is a moronic and quite vicious lie used many times as an attempt to downplay and often de-Albanise this great character at the heart of Albanian national identity. Scanderbeg became a legend already in his time and centuries after his death he was celebrated throughout Europe in literature and music, so it was not communist Albania who created the myth, he has been a myth for centuries, the regime only put more emphasis on his figure because of the country's delicate political situation being surrounded by very greedy neighbors Etimo (talk) 19:16, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

@Etimo: Islam became autochthonous in the region because a sizable number of Balkan peoples embraced the new faith, some by duress others through their own initiative. That legacy has shaped who they are, especially Bosniaks and Albanians. Just like Christianity, (originally also a middle eastern faith) was embraced by Balkan locals through similar means. On Skanderbeg, the communists upgraded this person to the figure of national hero. His memory had not survived the ages among Albanians in the Balkans and was mainly found among the Arberesh of Southern Italy. His uprising was in Northern Albania and overwhelmingly a faith based struggle against the Ottomans. The communists reinterpreted his uprising as a national one while removing the religious context. Such manipulation is mythmaking because Skanderbeg the historical person became embellished within the realm of legend instead of just facts. That king Zog and later the communists used Skanderbeg as a figure to legitimate themselves as some kind of successors to him also contributed to the myth. Skanderbeg was just a warrior figure who found a opportune time to rebel and reclaim his fathers possessions. He used religion to gain the loyalties of local Albanians, outside powers and mercenaries to secure his domain. He attempted to expand that domain through a anti-Ottoman league and it never materialised into a proper state because apart from Ottoman pressure, the local princes or barons did not trust his intentions toward them. You are right that outsiders in Europe did celebrate his memory, and they added to it things that went beyond the historical Skanderbeg. Once again they too where also engaging in mythmaking. As for "greedy neighbours", once supposedly free from the Ottomans every one in the Balkans has engaged in such behavior. Whatever the means undertaken, at least Pax Ottomanica kept things in check in stark contrast to the 20th century dominated by ethnic cleansing of the region by 'free and independent' states.Resnjari (talk) 19:36, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Skanderbeg. 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/20160202094921/http://www.mus.org.rs/sites/default/files/02_momcilo_spremic_-_borbe_za_oslobodenje_smedereva_1459-1485_0.pdf to http://www.mus.org.rs/sites/default/files/02_momcilo_spremic_-_borbe_za_oslobodenje_smedereva_1459-1485_0.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204194816/http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/archives/ficheFilm/id/3875/year/1954.html to http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/archives/ficheFilm/id/3875/year/1954.html
 * 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
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100910095427/http://www.albanianhistory.net/texts16-18/AH1515.html to http://www.albanianhistory.net/texts16-18/AH1515.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090902023802/http://albanianhistory.net:80/texts16-18/AH1510.html to http://albanianhistory.net/texts16-18/AH1510.html

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) 08:36, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

The article is not concentrated on where it should
The article in itself is a mess. This is partly a result of aim to include as much stuff as it can be found online. The lede is an example of WP:Undue where the weight is given only to some facts of Skanderbeg's life while information about some important elements of his life such as his anti-Ottoman rebellion is very limited or as in the case of his importance to the contemporary Albanians the information in the lede is inexistent. The Name sections has stuff which is too extensive, there is stuff on Skanderbeg's name in several documents and languages. The articles of other similar figures such as Alexander the Great, Napoleon and so on do no not concentrate in a such way to the names in different languages and eras. The editors have not forgotten to add that his surname was written somewhere in one or more documents (the article does not specify where, just the year that is 1408) Castriothi, a thing that may have been a result of writer's mistake. The Rebellion against the Ottomans section is too long if we keep in mind there is a much shorter article for the issue. In the end, there are four sections dedicated to the post-Skanderbeg era (There are three dedicated to his lifetime). Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:23, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Your proposal about the lede would lead to further Albanization of Sk, the way it was done in Albanian textbooks to create the myth of Sk. This article is not about that mythical Sk. This article is about real historical Sk, or at least it should be. For the most of his life, Sk was loyally serving Ottoman sultan. Even achieving one of the highest ranks in the Ottoman administration, the rank of sanjakbey. Insisting on his anti-Muslim struggle and neglecting his pro-Muslim pre-1443 life, would be a violation of undue. The same goes for text about the primary sources and its language.
 * You are right about the length of the rebellion section. There was a consensus reached a long time ago that the Rebellion section is indeed too long and should be trimmed. The same goes for the section about Sk in literature and arts. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:16, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The second point is OK as we both agree. I don't know where the "Albanization" of Skanderbeg came from because he was an Albanian and always signed himself as Lord of Albania. The "real" Skanderbeg is best known for his anti-Ottoman rebellion. Do you disagree with me? The body of article is concentrated on his anti-Ottoman rebellion and its legacy, the same thing should do the lede because it is the part of article that summarizes what the body says. The sources of the extensive stuff on Skanderbeg's name in various languages and eras should be placed at further reading section, the article is too long and this was the main reason why article failed to pass two GA nominations. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:34, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This article is biography article about Skanderbeg. There is another article about his rebellion against Ottomans, so there is no need to give last 20 years of his life undue weight. I think I gave a fairly clear reason for my position and I don't really have much to add to that now. You are of course free to disagree, but I don't think you should expect everybody to be now somehow obliged to keep discussing this with you for as long as you are dissatisfied with it.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:06, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * , Albanian authorities have not "Albanised" Skanderbeg, they secularised him under the communist regime and misused his legacy by creating a myth to attack Islam and promote Turkophobia and Islamophobia in Albania. Its why Skannderbeg today in Albania resembles something that people in Serbia or Greece are more attuned too regarding their nationalism (the Ottomans were "oppressors" thing ignoring other facets of the period) and the whole Turkophobic and Islamophic outlooks they now have. Looks like i am going to have do some future edits to these articles to clarify things.Resnjari (talk) 07:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Skanderbeg. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.omda.bg/imir/studies/alban_id9.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rastko.rs/rastko-pl/istorija/janiczar/djzivanovic-predgovor_l.php
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.njegos.org/petrovics/gvijenac.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.njegos.org/petrovics/scepan.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://albanianhistory.net/texts16-18/AH1510.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160313203243/http://albanianhistory.net/texts21/AH2008_2.html to http://www.albanianhistory.net/texts21/AH2008_2.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140605052159/http://www.skanderbegthemovie.com/ to http://www.skanderbegthemovie.com/

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) 23:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Skenderbeg is not Albanian !
Dont put false things on wikipedia you cant hide thing that are true, He is Serbian, He used to be a Lord of Albania but it was a part of serbia, just look to flag of Nemanjici, they have the same flag as flag of Skenderbeg, just different collors, and also montenegro flag (from that time) is also the same. Albanian country is made beetwen second balkan war and end of 1st world war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.216.195.251 (talk) 22:42, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Skanderbegs ethnicity is not really in doubt. All reliable historians, documents refer to him as being an "Albanian" from the Kruja region (which never had any noticeable Serb presence unlike Skadar). Contemporary Ottoman, Venetian, and many other Western sources refer to him as Albanian. Some Serbian scholars dispute this but Wikipedia is not about fulfilling Albanian or Serbian Nationalist fantasies. —— (talk) 20:16, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Serious sources calling him "Albanian", have previously made clear the meaning of the term. Oliver Schmitt explained that "Albanian" meaned: a) a resident of the the geographical area of Albania, independently of language/religion/ethnicity. b) A speaker of Albanian language, independently of area of origin, religion, ethnicity and c) people of the rural areas and the mountains (comparable to the modern meaning of "Vlachos" in Greek). Citation available upon request. Also, albanologist Konstantinos Giakoumis, in some cases treats the term "Albanians" as geographical identifier: Self identifications by Himarriots, 16th to 19th centuries. pp 225, 1st line, 226, 2nd from the end line. Further, people have not only father, but a mother too.--Skylax30 (talk) 20:25, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * a) apart from the reference of Himariots having fought in Skanderbegs' wars (which is the only thing relevant to this wiki page if an addition is made), what is the point with the rest of Giakoumis ? That whole journal article is about Himara (the issues you refer to are not only discussed on page 225 but the whole article) not Skanderbeg. b) Your interpretation (or citation) of Schmitt still notes that the term Albanian is used for an Albanian speaking person and also for someone from the area of Albania. Scholars have noted this for decades. Such things have also been noted in the article Names of the Albanians and Albania.Resnjari (talk) 21:12, 21 June 2018 (UTC)


 * It was just a comment on the creation of identities for the past. Giakoumis explains that Albania was also called Macedonia, and we are still looking for a source that Sk. was speaking Albanian as "mother" tongue.--Skylax30 (talk) 07:01, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I read in full what Giakoumis wrote. His journal article is about Himara, and how they have been noted/cited in various sources over the centuries and also in their own words. Its an scholarly overview of that data. Like i said, why is Giakoumis (apart from the bit that Himariots fought with Skanderbeg) relevant to this article? You are welcome to make an addition on Himariots and Skanderbeg, as per Giakoumis (Pappas also mentions the same thing as well) that's fine.Resnjari (talk) 13:39, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Gjon Kastrioti which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 07:31, 28 June 2018 (UTC)