Talk:Notis Botsaris

Disputes

Have I missed out on a new way of solving disputes? Since when do established editors engage in back-to-back revert-warring without any discussion about bibliography or any debate about relevant policies? Such cases represent a sharp degradation in the way disputes have been handled in the Balkan topic area in the last years and I expect from everyone to get back to the highly successful modus operandi which has produced stability. Two points for the debate itself:

1. There has to be a consensus about where names in Albanian are relevant and where they aren't. This will stop edit wars because it means that there's a clear benchmark for inclusion. The benchmark can't just be related to whether "sources exist" as sources which mention almost all of these figures in an Albanian variant certainly exist. The fact that "sources exist" doesn't mean that they are particularly relevant because while in the case of some like Kitsos Tzavellas/Kiço Xhavella we are dealing with a native Albanian-speaker who most likely was called by the Albanian variant of his name for most of his life, in other cases like Pavlos Kountouriotis sources don't reflect a native name but an Albanian-sounding transliteration even though he was definitely a native Albanian-speaker.
2. As such, I think that a rational standard would mean that Albanian is to be included a)for Souliotes and Arvanites who were born before 1815 and became known and/or died in the 19th century b)for Arvanites and Souliotes who were born after 1821 but were involved in Albanian cultural/linguistic/political movements e.g. figures like Anastas Kullurioti. Such a standard explicitly excludes figures like Pavlos Kountouriotis but also individuals like Katerina Botsari who was born in 1820 and didn't have any relation to a Souliot background despite her ancestry.
3. This article explicitly belongs in the former category like other similar articles - including Markos Botsaris/Marko Boçari from the same family.

• • I expect involved editors to respond to this comment with their own proposals.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:07, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I do think that's a good proposal. Arvanitika is an Albanian dialect and the Arvanites prior to their incorporation into the Greek state were simply known as Albanians. Alltan (talk) 18:11, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

• A fourth point:
  • If there is no consensus about the name in bibliography, then the name shouldn't be added. For names like Marko, Kiço, Not, Tush there is no ambiguity, but for general Christian names like variants of George which are represented in Albanian itself in several variations, there should be certainty before a name is added. If it's not known if Georgios Kountouriotis used a variant like Gjergj or one like Jorg then it's better to add no variant. It's already well known that these figures were Arvanites, hence it doesn't add anything more to the article if an uncertain native name is used.--Maleschreiber (talk) 21:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

    I can conditionally agree to this so long as the Albanian name restricted to the "native name" field in the infobox, and not also appear at the top of the infobox, as is done now, or repeated elsewhere in the article. This would also exclude Odysseas Androutsos btw. Khirurg (talk) 03:03, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

    • It appears at the top of the infobox after the Greek name because it's added in the "native name" field. Are you proposing something different than the current "interface" of articles like Kitsos Tzavelas for the infobox? Another mention in another part of the article is necessary right now in order to note that the name is in Albanian as the language is not mentioned in the infobox. A way to solve this is to add each name as "name - surname" (in Albanian) in the infobox. Another is to add it in the first line as Albanian: name and then remove it from the main body or we can do the opposite. The main point of all configurations is that the language of the name has to be mentioned somewhere. --Maleschreiber (talk) 03:15, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

      Regarding your first point, that's not true at all. It can be kept as the "native name" while also being removed from the top of the infobox [1]. I will not agree (and I strongly suspect neither will any Greek users) to the first line of the lede. I suppose in that the language of the name could be mentioned in the body text as is done now. Khirurg (talk) 03:31, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

      I also lean towards @Khirurg's proposal; ie the Albanian form of the name being in the "native name" of the infobox as long as, per Maleschreiber, it isn't ambiguous, like Bocari or Xhavella, while, as Khirurg noted, the name's langauge is already mentioned in the body of these articles. As Maleschreiber has correctly pointed out and as Alexikoua noted, the sources that include the name in the standard modern Albanian form might not necessarily represent the contemporary script, for example Bouboulina's name in latin script could've been Bouboulina, Bubulina, Mpoumpoulina (?). Meanwhile, Fan Noli's greek form of his name which he himself used was removed from the body of article as 'not relevant'. Just saying.

      I have been watching this conflict lately, eventhough I didn't actively participate, so shout out to @Maleschreiber for initiating what felt like a more civilised discussion and for making some good points above. Piccco (talk) 13:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Per Ashmedai's concern several irrelevant sources have been added to support a so-called Albanian script for various Arvanites. As such per wp:AGF I'm placing for now a qn tag: everyone is invited to provide the full quotes either here or in citation.Alexikoua (talk) 04:12, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I will not agree (and I strongly suspect neither will any Greek users) It is not a good thing you continue to divide editors into perceived ethnicities, and even talk on the behalf of "Greek editors". Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:43, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Simply providing an Albanian translation of a name doesn't make it a native name. This was already addressed.Alexikoua (talk) 00:51, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I haven't looked into the two sources as no direct citation was added, so please add it to make it a bit easier for other editors. However, unless a source explicitly mention his native name to be Noti Boçari, then I don't think it should be mentioned. As I have personally noticed, Albanian authors tend to use an "albanian variant" of names in general - hence rarely uses the actual names regardless of the origin of the individual. Even if Botsaris is Albanian by origin, that does not mean it is the native name of the individual, as there can be multiple Albanian variants of that name. Of course, unless the author explains it as not just another "albanian variant" of his Greek name. --Azor (talk). 02:35, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

• @Khirurg: A status quo which will hold needs to be balanced. The restrictions which I mentioned exclude figures like Kountouriotis and probably Odysseas Androutsos - figures for which the name of the father of Androutsos in the main body in Albanian will suffice. On the other hand, figures for which such restrictions don't apply need to have their Albanian variants unambiguously mentioned and not "hidden" somewhere. They don't have to be mentioned 3-4 times throughout the article but where they're mentioned this has to be in a position similar to the name in the Greek alphabet. As such, the name has to be mentioned at the top of the infobox with the language specified in brackets e.g. Marko Boçari (in Albanian) or in the first sentence as Albanian: Marko Boçari. --Maleschreiber (talk) 17:06, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

  Hello, from what I see, the name of the Botsaris is currently mentioned in the early life section, first thing you see. In fact, it seems that the Albanian name of the Bocari clan, the possible Albanian root of the name, the Albanian language of Botsaris, the Albanian script of the name are included all literally in the first paragraph. Doesn't seem like anything is hidden. Piccco (talk) 12:30, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

  The article describes the situation in 1756. What does this have to do with Souliotes in the 19th century 30 years after they left Souli? Botushali (talk) 13:28, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

  Yeah Im just saying that nothing is 'hidden'. The Albanian element is already stated mutliple times in the paragraph. Piccco (talk) 13:59, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

  Exactly. Besides the fact that Notis Botsaris lived till 1841, meaning he lived to see the Souliotes merge with the Greek nation. Khirurg (talk) 14:44, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

We don't really have any evidence that the Souliotes were assimilated in any Greek national identity in 1840, nor do we have any evidence that Greek national identity in this era required cultural assimilation. This is the case with Arvanites throughout the 19th century and prominent Souliotes participated in clubs like "Albanian Brothers" in this era. I separated the two sentences to avoid a very small dispute becoming a bigger one.--Maleschreiber (talk) 16:07, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

The dispute is getting bigger, because apparently it's never enough for some people. The agreement was, to leave discussions about the Souliotes' ethnicity in the Souliotes article, and nowhere else. That was the agreement. Khirurg (talk) 16:24, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

It’s not a bad proposal, because people want to annihilate the reality of the Souliotes “Albanianess” in favour of their “Greekness”. For the sake of NPOV, a link to the article suffices, although there would be nothing wrong with simply stating that they are a Christian Orthodox Albanian tribal community. When they assimilated into the Greek state as Greeks, their identity as Souliotes and their community subsequently eroded. Botushali (talk) 02:39, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Botsaraioi name removed

The name of the clan is removed without a valid reason. Even if being of Souliotic origin this isn't an excuse for removal. They wrote it down as Botsaraioi in their correspondence. I've added a Uni. of Standford pulication on the issue. Alexikoua (talk) 02:49, 24 July 2023 (UTC)