Talk:Stëblevë

Usage of Kanchov and reversion
User Local hero reverted my removal of the history section which bases itself on Vasil Kanchov's ''Македония. Етнография и Статистика'' (1900). This source is unreliable and erroneous. For example, Kanchov writes that the settlement of Borova was solely inhabited by Bulgarian Christians. This is in clear contradiction with an earlier register from the year 1873 in which Borova appears to have been inhabited exclusively by Albanian Muslims; 50 households specifically. Furthermore, in 1916 Borova is again recorded as an Albanian settlement. Only to be labelled as such again in Milenko Filipović's Golo Brdo eleške o naseljima, poreklu stanovništva, narodnom životu i običajima (1940). Those arguing in favour of Kanchov would have to, not only argue how an earlier register was wrong, but also how a village can go from Bulgarian Christian to Albanian Muslim in under a generation. It is clear that something is very wrong with Kanchov's work.--Lezhjani1444 (talk) 20:41, 2 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Kanchov may well have been wrong here, not really disputing that. However, Kanchov's work is found on many articles, so I'm not sure its reliability has been questioned. I'm not sure why we wouldn't include his statistics and then present the conflicting sources you describe. It is common for Wikipedia articles to present multiple conflicting sources. -- Local hero talk 02:53, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The problem is that presenting all viewpoints in this scenario, even contradictory ones, would create an issue of WP:FALSEBALANCE. It would imply that Borova, for example, may have been either Bulgarian Orthodox or Albanian Muslim despite the fact that in other (also older) registers or works it appears as an Albanian Muslim settlement. Even in more recent and modern works the village is discussed only as Albanian. Not only this, but the example of Borova does suggest that at least parts of Kanchov's work on the area were fabrications. As stated earlier, for Kanchov to be correct it would mean that Borova went from Albanian Muslim in 1873 to Bulgarian Orthodox in 1900, and then Albanian Muslim again in 1916. This does not logically follow. Lezhjani1444 (talk) 19:25, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure Kanchov qualifies as a fringe theory or minority viewpoint, to create a falsebalance issue. As it is used on many articles, I think it would rather be a significant view. -- Local hero talk 04:46, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with Lezhjani1444. Kanchov is an early 20th century source, and as per WP:AGEMATTERS, such old sources should be used after being very carefully evaluated. And they should be used only if considerably newer sources can't be found. Furthermore, even if it is a recent source that says sth contradicted by every other source, it can't be used due to a good rationale provided by WP:FALSEBALANCE and WP:EXTRAORDINARY. Kanchov is useful in a good number of articles, sometimes being the only available source, but here his coverage of Borova is misleading. Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:42, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Indeed, Kanchov being used in other articles does not necessarily mean that his position is a significant one or inherently correct. For his view to be considered significant it should be held in other independent works and studies rather than just in works citing his (in this case partly erroneous and fabricated) data. And as previously stated, citing him in this article in regard to villages such as Borova makes it seem as if they could indeed have been Bulgarian Christian in 1900, something which can be disproven and invalidated by other contemporary and older sources. And while I recognise that personal statements are not to be taken into consideration as evidence in Wikipedia, I do want to mention that my maternal side is from Borova and my great grandfather was born in roughly the same time that Kanchov was writing. He only spoke Albanian and was a Sunni Muslim; there were no Bulgarian Christians there at the time. However, I am not entirely opposed to citing Kanchov in specific cases where his work can be corroborated by other registers. Perhaps we should just focus of Stebleva in the article and avoid mentioning other villages. Lezhjani1444 (talk) 16:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have added a lot of sources with the data about Steblevo. Wikipedia works based on cited sources. Personal opinion is not important here. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 05:15, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree. However, It seems as if you have completely ignored what has been discussed here and reverted the article claiming that inadequate explanation was given, despite paragraphs providing reasons. Kanchov's data for Borova is incorrect and I have cited sources proving this here, thus citing him in that specific case is misleading and erroneous. As stated above, however, I am not opposed to using his work in the cases where it can be corroborated by other registers. Thanks. Lezhjani1444 (talk) 17:35, 14 May 2022 (UTC)