Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1714 revolt of Chameria

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Insufficient secondary sources. Jayjg (talk) 00:57, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1714 revolt of Chameria[edit]

1714 revolt of Chameria (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have tried to check the entire web but unfortunately there can't be found something under this or a similar title. Even the Albanian title: Revolta e Çamërisë e vitit 1714, gives zero results in google [[1]] (apart from wikipedia nothing) and googlebooks [[2]]. To sum we have:

  • Complete lack of any kind of sources (primaries&secondaries&tertiaries).
  • Even if there was some kind of rebellion in this region that is sporadically mentioned in Albanian historiography (English has for sure nothing to say about it), I hardly doubt if this was considered a Cham rebellion. Sounds like the usual pov to promote national agendas in Balkan related articles.Alexikoua (talk) 06:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since almost 20 days passed and there was no improvement in the article, I've initially placed the -verify- tag some days before and finally now it's time for afd.Alexikoua (talk) 07:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The creator of the article is not always online to bring the page of the book. However the appropriate tome of the History of the Albanian People by the Academy of Sciences of Albania from which this article seems to have referenced can be read online here. This is the 2002 version of the History of the Albanian People, the first one was in 1959. It is still used as a textbook at a University level in Albania. The article creator has correctly sourced. The article is missing background and aftermath, but those things can be added easily, because there is plenty of info in the History of the Albanian People book. I will improve the article in the next week, however I suggest the article be retracted from AfD as inadeguately listed here. --Sulmues Let's talk 07:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's a dead link [3].Alexikoua (talk) 07:49, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. Review please although you can't ctrl+F there. --Sulmues Let's talk 07:56, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
By the way is this the only single source that can be found?([[4]] what's this by the way?). If we can find at least one non-authoritative book (not initially published by an authoritarian authority like stalinist Albania of 1959 [[5]]) that confirms this it would be ok.
I trust that the book has been correctly scanned in that website, because I don't think the creator of the article took it from there. Btw, user:Balkanian's word was just given reviewer status. --Sulmues Let's talk 12:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see that the entire bibliography according to googlebooks, googlescholar seems to completely ignore (for example this leads to irrelevant results) this authoritarian-only sourced 6-lines confirmed event. Of course if a decent source can be found, we can reconsider. Alexikoua (talk) 10:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The History of the Albanian people was written in 2002 by a group of people in the Academy of Sciences of Albania. In 2002 Albania was NOT a stalinist country as 12 years earlier pluripartitism had entered Albania. It was not a republication of the same book, but a revised version, so I have no idea why you would bring totalitarian issues. In addition, the studies of the Academy of Sciences of Albania were all based on primary and secondary sources, with both historians and Ottoman documents of the time preserved both in Istanbul and Tirana. Furthermore, not everything is on Google. Albanian inhabited territories have a huge history of wars and upheavals, so it isn't strange that due diligence is more burdensome for this kind of events. This is not a reason to bring things to AfD though. It just disrupts our editing process. You know fully well Balkanian's word's work and you should have AGF'd him more on this I sense. --Sulmues Let's talk 12:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please focus on the specific topic and avoid wp:or. The specific url: doesn't contain any bibliography. Moreover, are you sure that this a work of 2002? This is 'nowhere' to be seen [[6]]. To sum up: a 6 line text taken from a link we didn't know its credibility doesn't seem to be enough for the creation of a separate article. We need something to confirm this rebellion, but even Albanian speaking bibliography in googlebooks/googlescholar doesn't mention this.Alexikoua (talk) 13:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(took off indent) I am focusing exclusively on the topic. You should be familiar with tertiary sources and their use. This book is a typical tertiary source (undergraduate level textbook). Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary.2C_secondary_and_tertiary_sources. --Sulmues Let's talk 21:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tertiary sources have bibliography but this has not. Moreover, it doesn't say that it is a 2002 version. It's probably much older (80s as it says) which makes it highly unreliable as stated above (moreover, where is the title? I see no book title in this url and probably is a fraction of a book). If this is really the one and only 'source' that briefly mentions this event I hardly doubt if it is enough.Alexikoua (talk) 21:47, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Alexikoua have you taken a history class? Because I have and my books didn't have bibliography, neither in Albania nor in the USA. The link says that it's a new edition, but Balkanian's word is saying that he took it from the History of the Albanian People, 2002 version, you are not AGF-ing him. It doesn't say 80s, it's saying that the first edition was in 1959, the second in 1972, the third in 1983 and the current one (from the link we don't know but BW is saying it should be 2002), is another year. It is a fraction of the book which has several tomes. The fraction is called "Turkish Presence in Albania". As a tertiary source it relies on secondary sources. But of course we can't work on them because you Greeks like to see this very long paragraph and prevent us Albanians from editing in Wikipedia by bringing to AfD every single article we create. --Sulmues Let's talk 00:35, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Asking for wp:agf alone isn't argument, especially if the same user has misused several authors in order to promote an extreme nationalistic pov.Alexikoua (talk) 13:39, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is no source of note to substantiate this even as an event.Megistias (talk) 20:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This event is covered in the textbook History of the Albanian People by Academy of Sciences of Albania. Cheers. kedadial 00:05, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No coverage whatsoever in reliable English (or non-English) language sources. History books of totalitarian regimes are not reliable sources. Many, many history books have been written about the Ottoman Balkans. The fact that none mention this event cast doubts on whether it actually happened. Athenean (talk) 00:26, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The history of the Balkan countries is full of wars and upheavals agains the Ottoman Empire. Every single event in particular is not covered by the world historigraphy, and the reasons may be many, but we have tertiary Albanian sources for that. The source is published by the Academy of Sciences of Albania, the highest scholar authority of Albania. I see many articles in Wikipedia that are not sourced with English sources, many of them go to DYK. Good faith is presumed for these articles and their presence in wikipedia enriches the encyclopedia. The 19th century Albanian National Awakening movement and the League of Prizren did not come out of nothing. On the contrary, there were many resistance movements, spontaneous or organized, like the 1714 revolt and other organized revolts, which prepared the terrain for the 19th century's important fight of the Albanians against the Ottoman Empire. As a result these revolts are extremely important events to show the background of the 19th century Albanian National Awakening. Indeed this article is currently poor, but once that we have some more articles to show its background, we'll be able to bring the Albanian National Awakening to a higher article class.--Sulmues Let's talk 13:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sulmues, you should please focus on this afd, which is virtually unsourced. Disrupting the proccess in repeating abstract comments leads to nothing.Alexikoua (talk) 14:04, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Could you please not accuse me of disruption? I above explained to you the difference between a secondary and a tertiary source and noted how a tertiary source can successfully be used in Wikipedia. We are relying on a single reliable source, this is the only argument that you have. Take a look around in Wikipedia and delete all the articles that rely on no sources or only on one reliable source and you'll have gotten rid of one fourth of the articles of the 3.2M ones that WP contains. --Sulmues Let's talk 10:28, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Nothing to substantiate information as to create an article. This is a non-event. Megistias (talk) 17:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 10:21, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete. I'm basing this not on any knowledge of the history of Albania, but on Wikipedia's sourcing policy - WP:PSTS says "Our policy: Reliably published tertiary sources can be helpful in providing broad summaries of topics that involve many primary and secondary sources." That sounds to me as if tertiary sources can be used, but only if primary and secondary sources are also available, so I think we would need at least one secondary source in order to keep this article -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:45, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: If anyone has a YouTube registration (I don't), perhaps they could contact the person who uploaded this and ask if they have any sources? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:52, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The video was created at 28 May while the article at 24 May. The creator of this video probably used wiki as source since he copy-pasted parts the text [[7]].Alexikoua (talk) 16:27, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, good point. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:40, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Source is reliable and article is notable.--I Pakapshem (talk) 12:55, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: User:I_Pakapshem is indef topic banned according to this case.Alexikoua (talk) 23:52, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: No book or something can confirm the event. I know this game, is it Total War?CrazyMartini (talk) 15:05, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep I found this [8] which seems to be the source for some of the statements in the article about events in 1708 and 1714 involving the "Cameri". This one, unfortunately, is a snippet view, but there may be more comprehensive sources. Mandsford 19:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Commment That's the same source that is already used in the article. It is moreover from the 1980's, when Albania was a totalitarian dictatorship, so official sources such as this should be taken with a grain of salt. Athenean (talk) 20:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/1714_revolt_of_Chameria&oldid=1137510121"