Talk:Spani family

Deletion of the cited additions of others
@ZjarriRrethues: You removed cited information about the ethnicity of members of Spani family.

Sources:

You explained your removal by writing in edit line: please don't make POV/OR deductions, I've already added that below. I am afraid that what you wrote is not true. The only removed information you added to the body of the article was the information about the meaning of the family name (beardles), but you did not add below the removed information about the ethnicity of Spani. Was this a mistake? In case this was not a mistake please explain your point. Let me remind you that what you did can be seen as a form of tendentious editing: removal of statements that are pertinent, sourced reliably, and written in a neutral style constitutes disruption and you are already warned not to engage in further: "ethno-nationalist tendentious editing--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:25, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The issue, which you analyzed in one word has been dealt with and explained by the use of modern sources in a complete section and without deductions that make little common sense. Btw misquoting and misattributing 1+ year old discussions is something that you have done before and you were warned by an admin about it when I was reviewing Gaius's GAN. -- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:42, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Will you present the text from the "complete section" you mention which contains information about the Greek ethnicity of the Spani family?
 * Will you present the diff with administrator warning me for misquoting and misattributing 1+ year old discussions when you were reviewing Gaius's GAN?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * and btw your somewhat modern sources don't mention the family but two members. Of course if you read the members section, there is a whole section about the legendary claims to imperial Byzantine origins from some members.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:41, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You did not answer my questions. Please answer my questions.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:58, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I replied on your talkpage too, so I can't/won't contribute anything else to this OR discussion i.e please stick to the modern and complete sources.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 10:19, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

You did write a message on my talk page, but you did not answer my questions.

In the meantime you continued with disruptive tendentious editing and removal cited addition about the Greek origin of the Spani family either directly or by misusing of the page moving.

Moving a page guide explains how to move a page. You did not follow it.


 * This was text of Peter Spani article before you moved it.
 * This is the text you moved into article Peter Spani (League of Lezhë).

You misused moving of the page to delete cited addition of other users which can be seen as Tendentious editing by someone who does not AGF.

You removed the cited information about Greek origin of Spani family with this edit under false excuse that you added removed text about the Greek origin of the Spani family into the body of the article, which is not true. Although I reminded you that what you did can be seen as a form of tendentious editing because removal of statements that are pertinent, sourced reliably, and written in a neutral style constitutes disruption and that you are already warned not to engage in further: "ethno-nationalist tendentious editing you continued with the same behaviour, falsely accused me, ignored my questions, misused moving of the page to delete my cited addition and refuse to discuss your edits.

You removed the same cited addition in other articles like here under false excuse that you explained that removal on the Talk:Spani family which you did not.


 * 1) Please stop your disruptive tendentious editing and follow wikipedia rules.
 * 2) Please answer my above two questions--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:46, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It's been almost 9 months and I hadn't noticed that you had this piece back. The version as it was written was much more precise as it applied to just a few members, whose "imperial" claims of ancestry were disputed and vague.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 22:29, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Skanderbeg and other chieftains from the region of Albania were Alfonso's vassals
There is scientific consensus (which includes Albanian nationalistic sources) that Skanderbeg became vassal after signing the Treaty of Gaeta. When other chieftains from the region of Albania signed similar treaties they also became vassals of Kingdom of Naples:

....
 * Robert Elsie, In 1458, Scanderbeg was summoned to Italy to fulfil his obligations as vassal under the treaty of Gaeta. - Historical dictionary of Albania
 * It was to Alfonso Aragona of Naples that Scanderbeg turned for military and financial support in 1450. In virtue of a treaty signed with that king the following year, he became a Neapolitan vassal and
 * Norman Housley, by the Treaty of Gaeta, Scanderbeg became the vassal of Alfonso of Naples
 * Skanderbeg in 1451 made an alliance with King Alfonso I of Naples (Alfonso V of Aragon), whose vassal he became, and a permanent Neapolitan garrison was installed in his fortress
 * Alfonso decided to take Scanderbeg under his protection as vassal in 1451
 * Iskender, as the loyal vassal of Ferdinand, went to aid him against the rebels
 * Alfonso of Aragon, to whom the Albanian hero had become a vassal in 1451 - Arshi Pipa, Sami Repishti
 * Skenderbeg felt encouraged to press for a firmer commitment, and in a treaty signed at Gaeta on 16 March 145 1 he pledged vassalage - Ramadan Marmullaku
 * Alfonso of Aragon, to whom the Albanian hero had become a vassal in 1451 - Arshi Pipa, Sami Repishti
 * Skenderbeg felt encouraged to press for a firmer commitment, and in a treaty signed at Gaeta on 16 March 145 1 he pledged vassalage - Ramadan Marmullaku

Therefore, based on the above presented sources, I will return information about vassalage to Naples, removed by Aigest.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Latest edits
Are non-consensual and oversimplified. Specialized sources state things more clearly Aigest (talk) 21:50, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Several sources are presented to support the Greek origin assertion. One of the sources I provided is written by the most specialized author for this topic (Schmitt) who confirmed the Greek origin assertion. Removal of cited addition of other editors is disruptive especially with false excuses. There are no "specialized sources" which contradict this assertion. Please revert yourself.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:44, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Stavrides explains the "legitimacy claims" in a very detailed manner, unlike century old sources that have been reused by Schmitt and a Serbian source, of which (during a whole year of reverting) you still haven't provided the basic source details like the title of the paper and its author.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 00:32, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No. This is not about "legitimacy claims" but about ethnic origin of this family. It is not disputed by Stavrides and his text about Alessio Span. On the contrary. Therefore Shufflay and Schmitt are enough to support the Greek origin assertion. Here is another source which supports the Greek origin assertion:
 * @Aigest, please revert yourself.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The above text is also published in one work published on Serbian language.
 * {{Citation |last=Božić |first= Ivan |author= Ivan Božić |authorlink=Ivan Božić (historian) |title= Glas |trans-title=|url= http://books.google.rs/books?ei=WgvqUP2FCoSL4ATEmoFw&id=kqorAQAAIAAJ&dq=%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8+%D0%B3%D1%80%D1%87%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B3+%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0&q=%22%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8+%D1%81%D1%83+%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B8+%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0+%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0+%D0%B3%D1%80%D1%87%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B3+%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%2C+%D0%BA%D0%BE%7D%D0%B0+%5D%D0%B5+%D1%83+XV+%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%83+%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B0+%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BD%D1%83+%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B3%D1%83+%D1%83+%D0%B4%D1%80%D1%83%D1%88%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BC+%D0%B8+%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BC+%D0%B6%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%83+%22 |archiveurl= |archivedate= |format= |accessdate= |edition= |series= |volume= |date= |origyear= 1976 |year=1980 |month= |publisher= Serbian Academy of Science and Arts |location= Belgrade |language= Serbian |isbn= |oclc=183333221 |doi= |doi-inactive-date=|bibcode= |id= |page=37 |pages= |nopp= |at= |chapter=Спани - Шпање |chapterurl= |quote=СПАНИ — ШПАЊЕ Приказано на V скупу Одељења историјских наука 15. септембра 1976) Спани су били разграната породица грчког порекла, ко}а ]е у XV веку имала извесну улогу у друштвеном и политичном животу северне Албаније |laysummary= |laydate= |separator= |postscript= |lastauthoramp= |ref= }}
 * Its author is Ivan Božić (historian) a Yugoslavian historian and member of the Serbian Academy of Science and Arts. He was an expert in history of medieval Zeta and the Venetian Republic's policy toward its coastal areas.
 * Conclusion: the Greek origin assertion of Spani family is supported with multiple reliable sources. I provided requested details, i.e. author and the title of the text published in Glas (written by professional historian specialized in the subject). Taking that in consideration the Greek origin assertion should be restored. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Provide full citation from Ivan Bozic and the reference he is using. I suspect the source is Milan Sufflay and you are using him three times, making it look like there are numerous sources while in fact there is only Milan Sufflay. You are POV pushing based on only one source. The text will be reverted accordingly Aigest (talk) 08:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The full citation of work written by Ivan Bozic was already provided with this edit which you reverted. Please find below the version with translated quote:
 * {{Citation |last=Božić |first= Ivan |author= Ivan Božić |authorlink=Ivan Božić (historian) |title= Glas |trans-title=|url= http://books.google.rs/books?ei=WgvqUP2FCoSL4ATEmoFw&id=kqorAQAAIAAJ&dq=%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8+%D0%B3%D1%80%D1%87%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B3+%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0&q=%22%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8+%D1%81%D1%83+%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B8+%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0+%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0+%D0%B3%D1%80%D1%87%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B3+%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%2C+%D0%BA%D0%BE%7D%D0%B0+%5D%D0%B5+%D1%83+XV+%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%83+%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B0+%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BD%D1%83+%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B3%D1%83+%D1%83+%D0%B4%D1%80%D1%83%D1%88%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BC+%D0%B8+%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BC+%D0%B6%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%83+%22 |archiveurl= |archivedate= |format= |accessdate= |edition= |series= |volume= |date= |origyear= 1976 |year=1980 |month= |publisher= Serbian Academy of Science and Arts |location= Belgrade |language= Serbian |isbn= |oclc=183333221 |doi= |doi-inactive-date=|bibcode= |id= |page=37 |pages= |nopp= |at= |chapter=Спани - Шпање |chapterurl= |quote=СПАНИ — ШПАЊЕ Приказано на V скупу Одељења историјских наука 15. септембра 1976) Спани су били разграната породица грчког порекла, ко}а ]е у XV веку имала извесну улогу у друштвеном и политичном животу северне Албаније [Spani - Španje; (Presented on V meeting of the Department of historical sciences on 15 September 1976) Spani was dispersed family of greek origin which had certain role in political and social life of northern Albania in 15th century] |laysummary= |laydate= |separator= |postscript= |lastauthoramp= |ref= }}
 * Below are details of another text written by Ivan Božić who confirmed the Greek origin assertion in his later (1983) work:
 * Please revert yourself.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Please revert yourself.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Please revert yourself.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

(unindent)Despite using many unused parametres even on the talkpage, you still haven't provided Bozic's original reference.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 20:19, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No need. Božić did not attribute this assertion but stated it as accepted by him.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Please stick to the consensus against your edits. You can't expect to reintroduce them every time you think that the users who opposed you are inactive.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 12:26, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Since there is no consensus against my edits I will stick to the sources. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:30, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * There is no consensus for any of your edits so next time you try to insert material rejected half a year ago it's AE.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 16:52, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * My edits are well sourced with secondary sources written by scholars who are experts for the topic. No valid argument is presented against my edits. Please do not remove cited assertions from the article anymore.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:47, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Andreas Angelos Komnenos descent
I have removed this again, because I just am not seeing the relevance. Maybe it is just badly written, but saying that Andreas Angelos Komnenos descended from an Emperor, and that his mother was a Spani, in no way indicates that he descendd from the Emperor via his mother rather than his father, and even were it through his mother, that it wasn't likewise through her mother and not through the Spani. I again request that this either be explained in a way that makes it clearly relevant, or left out. Agricolae (talk) 23:37, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Quotes
I think that not adding long quotes makes articles more accessible. I'll place all material at this section and remove the tags.
 * Kulišić (1980):
 * Kulišić (1980) mentions the Avar theory: Kovačević (1967) writes.
 * The paper by Vlajko Palavestra was in the article before expansion. I reworked it a bit to better explain the arguments. Palavestra writes: --Maleschreiber (talk) 19:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, thanks for sharing the quotes (i found them online and included some missing parts as well above). I still haven't managed to validate the Kovačević (1967) quote though. No link or title is given in the reference either (unless you added 1967 by mistake, and pertained to the 1970 work that is cited). Demetrios1993 (talk) 04:27, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Excuse the completion of the quotes i did above. Just noticed that it falls under WP:TPO, which is an issue. Reinstated the original. Demetrios1993 (talk) 05:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * there are several theories about the origin of the Spani. did Šufflay base his theory just on the origin of the name, or is there other evidence? – Βατο (talk) 11:55, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Just because there are additional suggested views on the origin of the family that doesn't mean the category in question cannot be added. Likewise Hayreddin Barbarossa has a disputed paternal origin, that is either Turkish or Albanian (by the way his maternal origin was Greek, and this is not disputed). By your rationale i suppose you wouldn't have a problem removing the respective Albanian category from there as well? Unless there is a double standard here. It would be good to know for similar disputes in the future. Demetrios1993 (talk) 12:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess if we follow Demetrios' rationale we should add the Albanian category to all notable Souliotes as well. Unless there is a double standard here. Ahmet Q. (talk) 13:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * There hasn't been any double standard by me in the past. I recall the case of Emmanuel Mormoris recently whose origin also became disputed, and he continues to have an Albanian category there. To be honest i considered this a natural approach and didn't even think twice of removing such an addition (not planning to do so either). In any case, even though Wikipedia considers these disputes meaningless and of minor importance per WP:ETHNO, it's good to know your stance in this, because from now on i will also abide by it. Demetrios1993 (talk) 15:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Wont reply to much because of time, but Demetrios cant have a double standard between Spani and the souliotes because it is impossible to have a double standard between them. The Spanis, or say Barbarossas origin is disputed, the Soulites' isn't. So while you can have a debate about The first two, the Soulites are of Albanian origin. No question about it, heck its in the lead of their article with like 20 sources. Alltan (talk) 16:04, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * A Greek origin seems a possibility and since its sourced there is no reason to remove the Greek descent category. That's a good catch. By the way there is no double standards case in Souliotes: the Souliotes category is included in the wider Greek people of Albanian descent cat [Category:Souliotes]. Alexikoua (talk) 18:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * There might be reason to remove it, we dont know yet since the discussion is ongoing. I was refering to the case where a editor was reverted for putting the category at Katerina Botsaris. Also I see it isnt at Markos Botsaris. Are you saying we are free to put that category on their articles too? Alltan (talk) 18:51, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Alltan, actually the sources you refer to are 12, but regardless of that if you read the whole article you understand that there are more than one views. Jim Potts (2014; pp. 107–108) who is cited in the article describes it well. Demetrios1993 (talk) 19:00, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I believe thats called WP:FRINGE, some sources still call Skanderbeg a Serb, but thats not treated seriously for reasons we wont get into (also i said 'like', but regardless 12 sources speak for theyself). Lets not grt into th whole Souliotes topic because its off-topic, but even if there was reasonable non fringe debate on their origin, the rational to add the albanian still holds according to all modes of reasoning. Ill leave the rest to you to you lot to figure out. Have a good one Alltan (talk) 19:06, 16 April 2021 (UTC)


 * it is based on a specific theory related to the surname. There are no historical records to support it. The Spani family emerged in the 14th century and they never claimed to be Greeks. I think that there should be cross-article consistency within reasonable bounds. Adding the category to Alessio Span or the other Spani is like adding "Greeks of Mongol origin" to Michael Tarchaniota Marullus because his ancestor 500 years ago might have been a Mongol according to one theory. Ethnicity is performative. If someone doesn't speak a language, doesn't identify as part of a particular group and isn't discussed in bibliography in connection to that group - in my book - it's strange to add a category because one of the theories about the historical origins of his family is about a specific group. I think that it was Ahmet who brought wider attention to the ethnicity of Mormori(s). I think that the category at his article has been placed because he was active in Albania and he is described as an Albanian, both in contemporary bibliography and in books - not archival material - published a few years after his death. In my book, if all that linked Mormori(s) to an Albanian origin was a very distant ancestry, then the category would be without functional meaning. None of the Spani had any relation to Greece, Greek language, the Greek community in Italy and in historical records they're seen as one of the Catholic Albanian families in Shkodra-Drisht-Lezha. All speculation about their origin, exists because of their surname.--Maleschreiber (talk) 21:52, 16 April 2021 (UTC)