This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Butrint article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@ Calthinus: We had a discussion on the many names Butrint has had during its history. Among others, you mentioned a few names reported by Lala. Should we create a "Name" section or should we add these names somewhere else in the article? Ktrimi991 ( talk) 22:48, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Editors are trying to replace Wikiproject:Greece with Wikiproject:Illyria, or add WP:Illyria alongside to it. In their edit summaries the editors argued that:
Then WikiProjectIllyria too should include this. Sources discuss Butrint in relation with trade and cultural contacts with Illyria, in a late antiquity/Middle Ages context some archaeology sources of Oxbow Books (Poulter 2019, Greenslade 2019) describe Butrint as a Greek/Roman city in Illyria, and other sources discuss the claims of Albanian nationalists about Butrinit being part of an Illyrian civilization."
If WP:Greece can have Butrinit, then geography is not a criterion so WP:Illyria can have Butrint too. I do not see two similar opinions on the side that does not accept the inclusion of WP:Illyria, while the other side has at least mentioned some sources. Move the discussion to TP, please!"
The one editor, even though they acknowledged that Buthrotum wasn't an Illyrian, but a Greek (and later, Roman) city, they argued that Wikiproject:Illyria should be added nevertheless just because the Greeks of Buthrotum had trade or cultural contacts with their Illyrian neighbors. (which is a problematic argument and has no precedent in Wikipedia. Had trade and cultural exchanges been a factor, then
Rome and
Carthage could have had Wikiproject:Greece added on their articles, considering how well-documented their heavy economic and cultural exchanges were between Greece and these these centers). (Edit: striking, as they are updated and already containing this Wikiproject, however, in conjunction to the Byzantine, not as standalone; the
Byzantine Empire had in its possession both of these cities). Furthermore, the editor pointed to select few sources describing the area around Buthrotum as having been part of Illyria, a theory which lacks strong support among the scholars and contrasts with the majority of the academic consensus in that Buthrotum was in Epirus, a historical region of ancient Greece. Last, the editor pointed out to contemporary nationalist Albanian claims (in Albanian politics, there is a strong anti-Greek sentiment and the nationalists have long-tried to de-hellenize places and make them Illyrian). Nationalism has no place in Wikipedia, and whether nationalists claim something, is irrelevant to the scope and purpose of the Wikiprojects.
The other editor argued that If WP:Greece can have Butrinit, then geography is not a criterion
. Even though this was never the case here: Wikiproject's criteria are clearly defined at
Wikiproject:Greece, which states what its scope is: History, including the prehistory of Greece, the history of ancient Greece including the Hellenistic world, the history of the Byzantine Empire and of medieval Greece in general, to the history of modern Greece
. ---
❖ SilentResident ❖ (
talk ✉ |
contribs ✎) 00:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
The cities are Athens, Corinth and Nemea in Greece, Sardis in Asia Minor, Beirut, Caesarea Maritima and Jerusalem in the Near East, Carthage in North Africa, and Butrint on the Illyrian coast of the Adriatic.[3]
Butrint with literary evidence about the medieval town. More specifically, it offers crucial information regarding the connection between southern Italy and this part of the Illyrian coast and confirms previous sporadic indications.[4]
While in Illyria , he visited Grammata (in the Acroceraunian range of the Vlorë district), Buthrotum (known today as Butrint, in the Saranda district, Dyrrachium (today known as Durrës) and Lissos (Lezhë today)[5]
for the south Illyrian colonies, see Shpuza 2006, assuming Byllis and Shkodra probably were founded on ager publicus, whereas Butrint was founded on newly confiscated land due to unpaid[6]
just like the inclusion in WPGreece does not indicate that Butrint is in the modern country of Greece. The article itself nowhere claims such things. Either both WPs stay or both go as the logic for both is the same.". If I understood well, you are suggesting that if WP:Illyria doesn't get added, then WP:Greece's presence should be removed from articles about ancient Greek cities? Sorry but this sounds like a blackmailing attempt which is unacceptable, is disruptive and goes down a dangerous path of suggesting that modern state borders may determine how Wikipedia's Wikiprojects cover the articles of their focus topic. This is not how Wikipedia works I am afraid. Had we gone with such a problematic logic, were the Wikiprojects had to be determined based on a modern-day country's boundaries, then articles such as the Arvanites would see the removal of WP:Albania since they are people who live in Greece, not Albania and no longer consider themselves Albanians. This is a very problematic logic you are using there and is finding me vehemently disagreeing with. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 13:08, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
We're using WikiProject Greece even though it has nothing to do with Butrint" Incorrect. Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece is explicitly about:
History, including the prehistory of Greece, the history of ancient Greece including the Hellenistic world, the history of the Byzantine Empire and of medieval Greece in general, to the history of modern Greece. Butrint was a Greek city, so removal of that Wikiproject is out of the question here. Ktrimi, equal treatment with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Illyria is also problematic, since the Wikiproject Illyria's focus topic is Illyria and the Illyrians and Butrint is nothing to do with them: the academic consensus is that Butrint's inhabitants were Greek subjects, and city was located in the historical region of Epirus. The late antiquity and early medieval ages, saw Illyria expanded greatly as a province, by the Romans/Byzantines, to include not just Butrint, but also large parts of Europe, stretching from Austria and Dalmatia in the north, down to Peloponnese and Crete in the south, (see Praetorian prefecture of Illyricum) but there is no evidence that Butrint, Thessaloniki, Austria, or even Crete and Corfu themselves, had really anything to do with Illyria and the Illyrians, other than belonging to a Roman/Byzantine province bearing its name. Using a name over areas that bore a name does not entitle the Wikiproject of same name's expansion to cover all these areas. The enlarged Illyria under Roman and Byzantine control had nothing to do with real Illyria and the Illyrians. Sorry but no. Names do not warrant inclusion of namesake projects. Wikipedia's common practices is to carefully avoid adding Wikiprojects about tribes or factions into articles without tangible evidence that these cities were actually inhabited or controlled by the subject of their focus. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 18:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
The cities are Athens, Corinth and Nemea in Greece, Sardis in Asia Minor, Beirut, Caesarea Maritima and Jerusalem in the Near East, Carthage in North Africa, and Butrint on the Illyrian coast of the Adriatic.[8]
Butrint with literary evidence about the medieval town. More specifically, it offers crucial information regarding the connection between southern Italy and this part of the Illyrian coast and confirms previous sporadic indications.[9]
While in Illyria , he visited Grammata (in the Acroceraunian range of the Vlorë district), Buthrotum (known today as Butrint, in the Saranda district, Dyrrachium (today known as Durrës) and Lissos (Lezhë today)[10]
for the south Illyrian colonies, see Shpuza 2006, assuming Byllis and Shkodra probably were founded on ager publicus, whereas Butrint was founded on newly confiscated land due to unpaid[11]
It is not only Iaof2017, but also one or two Greek editors" you sound as if you believe that one editor's actions are justifiable by the actions of other editors? That doesn't make it any better. Is still disruptive. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 21:42, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
The addition of "Roman colony and a bishopric" for an unexplained reason is added twice in lead. Moreover, chronological discrepancy is created when this Roman-era information is mentioned from the very first line and this is followed by pre-Roman era information (Chaonians & clasical-era). Going back and then forward in terms of history is definitely not a good way to begin an article per wp:MOS. Take also for example Amantia and Byllis where Hellenistic and Roman-era information is not mentioned from first sentence. Alexikoua ( talk) 03:32, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
the Roman period is the main reason why the settlememt is well-knownis unsourced. Khirurg ( talk) 18:38, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
Butrint (Greek: Βουθρωτόν and Βουθρωτός[2], romanized: Bouthrōtón, Latin: Buthrōtum) was an ancient Greek and later Roman city and bishopric in Epirus. If there is a proposal to change it, propose it and then change it but don't add a version which fundamentally changes the existing lead. Butrint was first and foremost a Roman colony, one of the most extensive of its kind in the region. This is the fundamental difference of Butrint with a settlement like Byllis. The site of the archaeological project follows a similar pattern and doesn't even calll it an "ancient Greek city" because the early history of the site goes through a radical shift in the Roman era [14]. I'm not necessarily opposed to restructuring the lead to address any concerns about minimization of Chaonian pre-Roman presence, but the way to do such is not to remove the mention of its Roman history.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 22:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
..and later Roman city and the seat of an early Christian bishopric in Epirus. Perhaps inhabited since prehistoric times it became part of the state of Epirus and later a Roman colony and a bishopric.The same text is repeated in consecutive sentences. It is highly intellectually dishonest to claim that "Roman history is removed." Roman history is not being removed, on the other hand, it is the Chaonian history that was removed [15]. Literal gaslighting. Khirurg ( talk) 00:15, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Originally a settlement of the Greek tribe of the Chaonians,...so both the pre-Roman and Roman history parts are repeated and no Chaonian history is removed. Side comment: The sentence is wrong in all possible ways as the settlement was a dependent of Kerkyra and only much later came under Chaonian control.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 00:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm not necessarily opposed to restructuring the lead to address any concerns about minimization of Chaonian pre-Roman presence, but the way to do such is not to remove the mention of its Roman history". You were probably too busy trying to remove the Roman part to understand what was going on. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 06:52, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
The usage of Greek, however, did not in any way make Ali Greek, just as his role as Ottoman appointee did not in any way make him Ottoman. He was first and foremost considered as an Albanian. (Fleming 2014, p. 60)
Unless there are serious issues with my version, I won't consider it inappropriate for Wikipedia. AlexBachmann ( talk) 16:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Butrint article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@ Calthinus: We had a discussion on the many names Butrint has had during its history. Among others, you mentioned a few names reported by Lala. Should we create a "Name" section or should we add these names somewhere else in the article? Ktrimi991 ( talk) 22:48, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Editors are trying to replace Wikiproject:Greece with Wikiproject:Illyria, or add WP:Illyria alongside to it. In their edit summaries the editors argued that:
Then WikiProjectIllyria too should include this. Sources discuss Butrint in relation with trade and cultural contacts with Illyria, in a late antiquity/Middle Ages context some archaeology sources of Oxbow Books (Poulter 2019, Greenslade 2019) describe Butrint as a Greek/Roman city in Illyria, and other sources discuss the claims of Albanian nationalists about Butrinit being part of an Illyrian civilization."
If WP:Greece can have Butrinit, then geography is not a criterion so WP:Illyria can have Butrint too. I do not see two similar opinions on the side that does not accept the inclusion of WP:Illyria, while the other side has at least mentioned some sources. Move the discussion to TP, please!"
The one editor, even though they acknowledged that Buthrotum wasn't an Illyrian, but a Greek (and later, Roman) city, they argued that Wikiproject:Illyria should be added nevertheless just because the Greeks of Buthrotum had trade or cultural contacts with their Illyrian neighbors. (which is a problematic argument and has no precedent in Wikipedia. Had trade and cultural exchanges been a factor, then
Rome and
Carthage could have had Wikiproject:Greece added on their articles, considering how well-documented their heavy economic and cultural exchanges were between Greece and these these centers). (Edit: striking, as they are updated and already containing this Wikiproject, however, in conjunction to the Byzantine, not as standalone; the
Byzantine Empire had in its possession both of these cities). Furthermore, the editor pointed to select few sources describing the area around Buthrotum as having been part of Illyria, a theory which lacks strong support among the scholars and contrasts with the majority of the academic consensus in that Buthrotum was in Epirus, a historical region of ancient Greece. Last, the editor pointed out to contemporary nationalist Albanian claims (in Albanian politics, there is a strong anti-Greek sentiment and the nationalists have long-tried to de-hellenize places and make them Illyrian). Nationalism has no place in Wikipedia, and whether nationalists claim something, is irrelevant to the scope and purpose of the Wikiprojects.
The other editor argued that If WP:Greece can have Butrinit, then geography is not a criterion
. Even though this was never the case here: Wikiproject's criteria are clearly defined at
Wikiproject:Greece, which states what its scope is: History, including the prehistory of Greece, the history of ancient Greece including the Hellenistic world, the history of the Byzantine Empire and of medieval Greece in general, to the history of modern Greece
. ---
❖ SilentResident ❖ (
talk ✉ |
contribs ✎) 00:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
The cities are Athens, Corinth and Nemea in Greece, Sardis in Asia Minor, Beirut, Caesarea Maritima and Jerusalem in the Near East, Carthage in North Africa, and Butrint on the Illyrian coast of the Adriatic.[3]
Butrint with literary evidence about the medieval town. More specifically, it offers crucial information regarding the connection between southern Italy and this part of the Illyrian coast and confirms previous sporadic indications.[4]
While in Illyria , he visited Grammata (in the Acroceraunian range of the Vlorë district), Buthrotum (known today as Butrint, in the Saranda district, Dyrrachium (today known as Durrës) and Lissos (Lezhë today)[5]
for the south Illyrian colonies, see Shpuza 2006, assuming Byllis and Shkodra probably were founded on ager publicus, whereas Butrint was founded on newly confiscated land due to unpaid[6]
just like the inclusion in WPGreece does not indicate that Butrint is in the modern country of Greece. The article itself nowhere claims such things. Either both WPs stay or both go as the logic for both is the same.". If I understood well, you are suggesting that if WP:Illyria doesn't get added, then WP:Greece's presence should be removed from articles about ancient Greek cities? Sorry but this sounds like a blackmailing attempt which is unacceptable, is disruptive and goes down a dangerous path of suggesting that modern state borders may determine how Wikipedia's Wikiprojects cover the articles of their focus topic. This is not how Wikipedia works I am afraid. Had we gone with such a problematic logic, were the Wikiprojects had to be determined based on a modern-day country's boundaries, then articles such as the Arvanites would see the removal of WP:Albania since they are people who live in Greece, not Albania and no longer consider themselves Albanians. This is a very problematic logic you are using there and is finding me vehemently disagreeing with. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 13:08, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
We're using WikiProject Greece even though it has nothing to do with Butrint" Incorrect. Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece is explicitly about:
History, including the prehistory of Greece, the history of ancient Greece including the Hellenistic world, the history of the Byzantine Empire and of medieval Greece in general, to the history of modern Greece. Butrint was a Greek city, so removal of that Wikiproject is out of the question here. Ktrimi, equal treatment with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Illyria is also problematic, since the Wikiproject Illyria's focus topic is Illyria and the Illyrians and Butrint is nothing to do with them: the academic consensus is that Butrint's inhabitants were Greek subjects, and city was located in the historical region of Epirus. The late antiquity and early medieval ages, saw Illyria expanded greatly as a province, by the Romans/Byzantines, to include not just Butrint, but also large parts of Europe, stretching from Austria and Dalmatia in the north, down to Peloponnese and Crete in the south, (see Praetorian prefecture of Illyricum) but there is no evidence that Butrint, Thessaloniki, Austria, or even Crete and Corfu themselves, had really anything to do with Illyria and the Illyrians, other than belonging to a Roman/Byzantine province bearing its name. Using a name over areas that bore a name does not entitle the Wikiproject of same name's expansion to cover all these areas. The enlarged Illyria under Roman and Byzantine control had nothing to do with real Illyria and the Illyrians. Sorry but no. Names do not warrant inclusion of namesake projects. Wikipedia's common practices is to carefully avoid adding Wikiprojects about tribes or factions into articles without tangible evidence that these cities were actually inhabited or controlled by the subject of their focus. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 18:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
The cities are Athens, Corinth and Nemea in Greece, Sardis in Asia Minor, Beirut, Caesarea Maritima and Jerusalem in the Near East, Carthage in North Africa, and Butrint on the Illyrian coast of the Adriatic.[8]
Butrint with literary evidence about the medieval town. More specifically, it offers crucial information regarding the connection between southern Italy and this part of the Illyrian coast and confirms previous sporadic indications.[9]
While in Illyria , he visited Grammata (in the Acroceraunian range of the Vlorë district), Buthrotum (known today as Butrint, in the Saranda district, Dyrrachium (today known as Durrës) and Lissos (Lezhë today)[10]
for the south Illyrian colonies, see Shpuza 2006, assuming Byllis and Shkodra probably were founded on ager publicus, whereas Butrint was founded on newly confiscated land due to unpaid[11]
It is not only Iaof2017, but also one or two Greek editors" you sound as if you believe that one editor's actions are justifiable by the actions of other editors? That doesn't make it any better. Is still disruptive. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 21:42, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
The addition of "Roman colony and a bishopric" for an unexplained reason is added twice in lead. Moreover, chronological discrepancy is created when this Roman-era information is mentioned from the very first line and this is followed by pre-Roman era information (Chaonians & clasical-era). Going back and then forward in terms of history is definitely not a good way to begin an article per wp:MOS. Take also for example Amantia and Byllis where Hellenistic and Roman-era information is not mentioned from first sentence. Alexikoua ( talk) 03:32, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
the Roman period is the main reason why the settlememt is well-knownis unsourced. Khirurg ( talk) 18:38, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
Butrint (Greek: Βουθρωτόν and Βουθρωτός[2], romanized: Bouthrōtón, Latin: Buthrōtum) was an ancient Greek and later Roman city and bishopric in Epirus. If there is a proposal to change it, propose it and then change it but don't add a version which fundamentally changes the existing lead. Butrint was first and foremost a Roman colony, one of the most extensive of its kind in the region. This is the fundamental difference of Butrint with a settlement like Byllis. The site of the archaeological project follows a similar pattern and doesn't even calll it an "ancient Greek city" because the early history of the site goes through a radical shift in the Roman era [14]. I'm not necessarily opposed to restructuring the lead to address any concerns about minimization of Chaonian pre-Roman presence, but the way to do such is not to remove the mention of its Roman history.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 22:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
..and later Roman city and the seat of an early Christian bishopric in Epirus. Perhaps inhabited since prehistoric times it became part of the state of Epirus and later a Roman colony and a bishopric.The same text is repeated in consecutive sentences. It is highly intellectually dishonest to claim that "Roman history is removed." Roman history is not being removed, on the other hand, it is the Chaonian history that was removed [15]. Literal gaslighting. Khirurg ( talk) 00:15, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Originally a settlement of the Greek tribe of the Chaonians,...so both the pre-Roman and Roman history parts are repeated and no Chaonian history is removed. Side comment: The sentence is wrong in all possible ways as the settlement was a dependent of Kerkyra and only much later came under Chaonian control.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 00:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm not necessarily opposed to restructuring the lead to address any concerns about minimization of Chaonian pre-Roman presence, but the way to do such is not to remove the mention of its Roman history". You were probably too busy trying to remove the Roman part to understand what was going on. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 06:52, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
The usage of Greek, however, did not in any way make Ali Greek, just as his role as Ottoman appointee did not in any way make him Ottoman. He was first and foremost considered as an Albanian. (Fleming 2014, p. 60)
Unless there are serious issues with my version, I won't consider it inappropriate for Wikipedia. AlexBachmann ( talk) 16:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)