What is the specific aim of this template? If this is intended to be a Geographic sidebar to aid in article navigation, why does it include a cultural part and why does it exclude all of Montenegro's tribes, e.g. Hoti Rogami? If it is not intended to be geographical, why does it include both Slavic tribes (Rovca,Ozrinici) and Albanian or Vlach tribes? I propose removing the Concepts/History/Culture subsections and including all other tribes (pleme/fis) that existed in the area. Alltan ( talk) 14:20, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- It is intended to be geographic sidebar, not ethnic (Slavic). If any specific tribe is missing, it can be added. Tresnjevo ( talk) 06:41, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
- I got an automated ping which notified me that articles which I have written like
Kryethi (added by
Alltan) were linked to this page. Fis of
Malësia or Ulqin are not "tribes of Montenegro" just because these regions became part of Montenegro in 1878-1912. Tribes which predate the existence of Montenegro and didn't exist when Montenegro came to exist aren't "tribes of Montenegro" either. I am not and will not be involved in the discussion but I ask that I do not be brought again to this discussion by finding out via automated pings that articles which I have written were anachronistically placed in this template. I have asked many times editors on all sides to be careful and not add anachronistic labels to tribes. Thank you.--
Maleschreiber (
talk) 13:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
- This template was created for CURRENT territory of Montenegro and Herzegovina. Original territory of Montenegro is what is called today Old Montenegro (Stara Crna Gora in Serbian), so your logic makes no sense because Bay of Kotor wasn't part of Montenegro before 1912 either. In fact, it became part of Montenegro in 1945. Also, all other parts of present day Montenegro (Highlands, Zeta etc.) were not part of original Montenegro. So let me repeat - this template is used for all tribes (ones that still exist and those that existed couple of hundred years ago) on current territory of Montenegro and Herzegovina. And when you say that "I am not and will not be involved in the discussion", that just shows your arrogance which borders vandalism having in mind that you removed half of this template without any conversation on this talk page.
Tresnjevo (
talk) 20:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- I am inclined to agree with the points made by MS. Its best this template serves a geographic role pertaining to tribes which existed after the establishment of Montenegro. If that's not done, somebody could just as easily start adding in Illyrian tribes like the Labeati or Autariatae, reasoning that these inhabited the region which would one day come to be known as Montenegro. Also let's stop the ad hominem's. Alltan ( talk) 11:54, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- This template was created for CURRENT territory of Montenegro and Herzegovina. Original territory of Montenegro is what is called today Old Montenegro (Stara Crna Gora in Serbian), so your logic makes no sense because Bay of Kotor wasn't part of Montenegro before 1912 either. In fact, it became part of Montenegro in 1945. Also, all other parts of present day Montenegro (Highlands, Zeta etc.) were not part of original Montenegro. So let me repeat - this template is used for all tribes (ones that still exist and those that existed couple of hundred years ago) on current territory of Montenegro and Herzegovina. And when you say that "I am not and will not be involved in the discussion", that just shows your arrogance which borders vandalism having in mind that you removed half of this template without any conversation on this talk page.
Tresnjevo (
talk) 20:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- What do you mean (current) Herzegovina ? How can we cram two different concept terms under one meaning - Herzegovina is a geo name for vaguely defined territory and Montenegro is precise name for precisely known territory as geo-political whole. Shouldn't we, than, use Bosnia and Herzegovina opposite to Montenegro? Further, why not, than, include tribes from western Herzegovina, or tribes such as Albanian tribe from the very heart of the region (Herzegovina), etc. This navbox could use better bearings, otherwise we are on pretty much slippery slope.
౪ Santa ౪
99° 15:05, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- Tribes from Herzegovina are artificial and were not made in Herzegovina. Most were immigrants unlike tribes in Montenegro or Malesia which were formed in a entire region or what not, not to forget Herzegovinians in Bosnia were very close to Montenegrins and participated in battles and uprisings together. Surix321 ( talk) 03:32, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- What do you mean (current) Herzegovina ? How can we cram two different concept terms under one meaning - Herzegovina is a geo name for vaguely defined territory and Montenegro is precise name for precisely known territory as geo-political whole. Shouldn't we, than, use Bosnia and Herzegovina opposite to Montenegro? Further, why not, than, include tribes from western Herzegovina, or tribes such as Albanian tribe from the very heart of the region (Herzegovina), etc. This navbox could use better bearings, otherwise we are on pretty much slippery slope.
౪ Santa ౪
99° 15:05, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
The general status quo of this template is that we include Brda and other Slavic-speaking communities but we don't include historical tribes which didn't exist when the concept of Montenegro came to include the Brda or areas outside Montenegro/Old Herzegovina. This includes the Mataguzi, Mataruga, Malonšići and a few others. In this regard, Alltan's edits are correct and Krisitor needs to do some self-reverting. Maleschreiber ( talk) 17:05, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
- @
Maleschreiber, please stop inventing rules from nowhere. The statu quo that @
Alltan broke himself was to base this template on geography, and geographically, these tribes were located in the territory of present-day Montenegro. Furthermore, since some of them became part of other tribes such as the Piperi, their inclusion in the template makes even more sense.
Krisitor (
talk) 17:35, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
- You can find how the status of the template evolved via the "view history" tab. The article is geographical, but it can't include tribes which didn't exist when the term Montenegro came to incorporate these areas. I can somewhat see as reasonable the inclusion of tribes which at least theoretically became part of tribes which are mentioned in the template, but tribes like
Mataguzi or
Mataruga serve no encyclopedic purpose in this template. The Mataruga were never even documented in today's Montenegro unlike their cousins in Bjelice.--
Maleschreiber (
talk) 18:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
- I had already checked the history and what I saw was that many changes had been made without any agreement on this discussion page. However, I agree with your point, but as far as the
Mataruge are concerned, given that they were located in the region of
Grahovo at some point, I remain dubious as to the need to remove them from this template. On the other hand, I don't see what the
Maleševci are doing in this template either, so I'll delete them. Regarding the
Mataguži, they were a community of Albanian origin that was Slavicized after they joined the Orthodox Church. They were located to the south of Podgorica, precisely where the village of
Mataguži is today, whose current inhabitants are therefore most likely descended to a large extent from the "tribe" itself, assuming it reached such a stage of development, which is not mentioned in the primary sources.
Krisitor (
talk) 12:25, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- your original research on the Mataguzi while interesting is irrelevant to this talk page. If you have sources which describe the Mataguzi as a Slavic speaking tribe in 1516 then I think they can be included. Otherwise why not include the Illyrian and Slavic tribes which existed in the area historically? Not really helpful to any reader.
Alltan (
talk) 15:12, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- We include the medieval tribes of Zeta in this template because it was at this time that tribes, in the sense of pleme, or fis if you prefer, came into being, that's all. As such,
Illyrian tribes and
Slavic tribes are
WP:OFFTOPIC and can't be used as an argument to remove late medieval tribes of present-day Montenegro. Regarding the Mataguži, that they joined the Orthodox Church is well documented, this is not
WP:OR, and that they are in part the ancestors of the current inhabitants of the village of the same name is also attested in several sources and even remembered by the Kuči.
Krisitor (
talk) 17:41, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- You have not provided the sources which are necessary to permit the inclusion of such tribes in this template. The template is called tribes of Montenegro, not medieval tribes of Zeta. I will revert your edit.
Alltan (
talk) 17:44, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- You didn't provide any good reason not to keep the template the way it has been for years, you didn't reach
WP:CONSENSUS, and Wikipedia is based on consensus.
Krisitor (
talk) 17:58, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- There is something called
WP:STONEWALLING. You have failed to provide sources refering to any of the disputed tribe's as existing in tribal form after 1516. This is the criteria upon which this template is built.
Alltan (
talk) 18:01, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- I set out my arguments, but you didn't respond in any way, and you clearly didn't want to discuss them. And it has nothing to do with the year 1516 or any other year you may propose.
Krisitor (
talk) 18:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- The template is about tribes which existed during the historical context of the state of Montenegro, specifically tribes which were ingrained culturally and politically with the Montenegrin state. You can see no Albanian tribes are present, because they fail the
WP:SCOPE of this template. I also bear in mind that Wikipedia is
WP:NOTFORUM.
Alltan (
talk) 18:08, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
The template is about tribes which existed during the historical context of the state of Montenegro, specifically tribes which were ingrained culturally and politically with the Montenegrin state.
That's your sole WP:OPINION but that's not why the template was originally conceived. The Mataguži, Macure, Mataruge, Kriči and other pre-Slavic tribes were/are often if not always studied within the scope of Montenegrin tribes, and mostly in Yugoslav and then Serbian or Montenegrin scholarship. I even remember reading a Studia Albanica article from the 1980s in which the Mataguži were presented as an old "Montenegrin tribe". And of course, none of these tribes is Montenegrin per se, however, they are strongly tied to the history of the geographical area that would eventually became Montenegro. As such, there is no need to remove them from the template. Krisitor ( talk) 11:54, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- The template is about tribes which existed during the historical context of the state of Montenegro, specifically tribes which were ingrained culturally and politically with the Montenegrin state. You can see no Albanian tribes are present, because they fail the
WP:SCOPE of this template. I also bear in mind that Wikipedia is
WP:NOTFORUM.
Alltan (
talk) 18:08, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- I set out my arguments, but you didn't respond in any way, and you clearly didn't want to discuss them. And it has nothing to do with the year 1516 or any other year you may propose.
Krisitor (
talk) 18:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- There is something called
WP:STONEWALLING. You have failed to provide sources refering to any of the disputed tribe's as existing in tribal form after 1516. This is the criteria upon which this template is built.
Alltan (
talk) 18:01, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- You didn't provide any good reason not to keep the template the way it has been for years, you didn't reach
WP:CONSENSUS, and Wikipedia is based on consensus.
Krisitor (
talk) 17:58, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- You have not provided the sources which are necessary to permit the inclusion of such tribes in this template. The template is called tribes of Montenegro, not medieval tribes of Zeta. I will revert your edit.
Alltan (
talk) 17:44, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- We include the medieval tribes of Zeta in this template because it was at this time that tribes, in the sense of pleme, or fis if you prefer, came into being, that's all. As such,
Illyrian tribes and
Slavic tribes are
WP:OFFTOPIC and can't be used as an argument to remove late medieval tribes of present-day Montenegro. Regarding the Mataguži, that they joined the Orthodox Church is well documented, this is not
WP:OR, and that they are in part the ancestors of the current inhabitants of the village of the same name is also attested in several sources and even remembered by the Kuči.
Krisitor (
talk) 17:41, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- your original research on the Mataguzi while interesting is irrelevant to this talk page. If you have sources which describe the Mataguzi as a Slavic speaking tribe in 1516 then I think they can be included. Otherwise why not include the Illyrian and Slavic tribes which existed in the area historically? Not really helpful to any reader.
Alltan (
talk) 15:12, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- I had already checked the history and what I saw was that many changes had been made without any agreement on this discussion page. However, I agree with your point, but as far as the
Mataruge are concerned, given that they were located in the region of
Grahovo at some point, I remain dubious as to the need to remove them from this template. On the other hand, I don't see what the
Maleševci are doing in this template either, so I'll delete them. Regarding the
Mataguži, they were a community of Albanian origin that was Slavicized after they joined the Orthodox Church. They were located to the south of Podgorica, precisely where the village of
Mataguži is today, whose current inhabitants are therefore most likely descended to a large extent from the "tribe" itself, assuming it reached such a stage of development, which is not mentioned in the primary sources.
Krisitor (
talk) 12:25, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- You can find how the status of the template evolved via the "view history" tab. The article is geographical, but it can't include tribes which didn't exist when the term Montenegro came to incorporate these areas. I can somewhat see as reasonable the inclusion of tribes which at least theoretically became part of tribes which are mentioned in the template, but tribes like
Mataguzi or
Mataruga serve no encyclopedic purpose in this template. The Mataruga were never even documented in today's Montenegro unlike their cousins in Bjelice.--
Maleschreiber (
talk) 18:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
What is the specific aim of this template? If this is intended to be a Geographic sidebar to aid in article navigation, why does it include a cultural part and why does it exclude all of Montenegro's tribes, e.g. Hoti Rogami? If it is not intended to be geographical, why does it include both Slavic tribes (Rovca,Ozrinici) and Albanian or Vlach tribes? I propose removing the Concepts/History/Culture subsections and including all other tribes (pleme/fis) that existed in the area. Alltan ( talk) 14:20, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- It is intended to be geographic sidebar, not ethnic (Slavic). If any specific tribe is missing, it can be added. Tresnjevo ( talk) 06:41, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
- I got an automated ping which notified me that articles which I have written like
Kryethi (added by
Alltan) were linked to this page. Fis of
Malësia or Ulqin are not "tribes of Montenegro" just because these regions became part of Montenegro in 1878-1912. Tribes which predate the existence of Montenegro and didn't exist when Montenegro came to exist aren't "tribes of Montenegro" either. I am not and will not be involved in the discussion but I ask that I do not be brought again to this discussion by finding out via automated pings that articles which I have written were anachronistically placed in this template. I have asked many times editors on all sides to be careful and not add anachronistic labels to tribes. Thank you.--
Maleschreiber (
talk) 13:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
- This template was created for CURRENT territory of Montenegro and Herzegovina. Original territory of Montenegro is what is called today Old Montenegro (Stara Crna Gora in Serbian), so your logic makes no sense because Bay of Kotor wasn't part of Montenegro before 1912 either. In fact, it became part of Montenegro in 1945. Also, all other parts of present day Montenegro (Highlands, Zeta etc.) were not part of original Montenegro. So let me repeat - this template is used for all tribes (ones that still exist and those that existed couple of hundred years ago) on current territory of Montenegro and Herzegovina. And when you say that "I am not and will not be involved in the discussion", that just shows your arrogance which borders vandalism having in mind that you removed half of this template without any conversation on this talk page.
Tresnjevo (
talk) 20:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- I am inclined to agree with the points made by MS. Its best this template serves a geographic role pertaining to tribes which existed after the establishment of Montenegro. If that's not done, somebody could just as easily start adding in Illyrian tribes like the Labeati or Autariatae, reasoning that these inhabited the region which would one day come to be known as Montenegro. Also let's stop the ad hominem's. Alltan ( talk) 11:54, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- This template was created for CURRENT territory of Montenegro and Herzegovina. Original territory of Montenegro is what is called today Old Montenegro (Stara Crna Gora in Serbian), so your logic makes no sense because Bay of Kotor wasn't part of Montenegro before 1912 either. In fact, it became part of Montenegro in 1945. Also, all other parts of present day Montenegro (Highlands, Zeta etc.) were not part of original Montenegro. So let me repeat - this template is used for all tribes (ones that still exist and those that existed couple of hundred years ago) on current territory of Montenegro and Herzegovina. And when you say that "I am not and will not be involved in the discussion", that just shows your arrogance which borders vandalism having in mind that you removed half of this template without any conversation on this talk page.
Tresnjevo (
talk) 20:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- What do you mean (current) Herzegovina ? How can we cram two different concept terms under one meaning - Herzegovina is a geo name for vaguely defined territory and Montenegro is precise name for precisely known territory as geo-political whole. Shouldn't we, than, use Bosnia and Herzegovina opposite to Montenegro? Further, why not, than, include tribes from western Herzegovina, or tribes such as Albanian tribe from the very heart of the region (Herzegovina), etc. This navbox could use better bearings, otherwise we are on pretty much slippery slope.
౪ Santa ౪
99° 15:05, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- Tribes from Herzegovina are artificial and were not made in Herzegovina. Most were immigrants unlike tribes in Montenegro or Malesia which were formed in a entire region or what not, not to forget Herzegovinians in Bosnia were very close to Montenegrins and participated in battles and uprisings together. Surix321 ( talk) 03:32, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- What do you mean (current) Herzegovina ? How can we cram two different concept terms under one meaning - Herzegovina is a geo name for vaguely defined territory and Montenegro is precise name for precisely known territory as geo-political whole. Shouldn't we, than, use Bosnia and Herzegovina opposite to Montenegro? Further, why not, than, include tribes from western Herzegovina, or tribes such as Albanian tribe from the very heart of the region (Herzegovina), etc. This navbox could use better bearings, otherwise we are on pretty much slippery slope.
౪ Santa ౪
99° 15:05, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
The general status quo of this template is that we include Brda and other Slavic-speaking communities but we don't include historical tribes which didn't exist when the concept of Montenegro came to include the Brda or areas outside Montenegro/Old Herzegovina. This includes the Mataguzi, Mataruga, Malonšići and a few others. In this regard, Alltan's edits are correct and Krisitor needs to do some self-reverting. Maleschreiber ( talk) 17:05, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
- @
Maleschreiber, please stop inventing rules from nowhere. The statu quo that @
Alltan broke himself was to base this template on geography, and geographically, these tribes were located in the territory of present-day Montenegro. Furthermore, since some of them became part of other tribes such as the Piperi, their inclusion in the template makes even more sense.
Krisitor (
talk) 17:35, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
- You can find how the status of the template evolved via the "view history" tab. The article is geographical, but it can't include tribes which didn't exist when the term Montenegro came to incorporate these areas. I can somewhat see as reasonable the inclusion of tribes which at least theoretically became part of tribes which are mentioned in the template, but tribes like
Mataguzi or
Mataruga serve no encyclopedic purpose in this template. The Mataruga were never even documented in today's Montenegro unlike their cousins in Bjelice.--
Maleschreiber (
talk) 18:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
- I had already checked the history and what I saw was that many changes had been made without any agreement on this discussion page. However, I agree with your point, but as far as the
Mataruge are concerned, given that they were located in the region of
Grahovo at some point, I remain dubious as to the need to remove them from this template. On the other hand, I don't see what the
Maleševci are doing in this template either, so I'll delete them. Regarding the
Mataguži, they were a community of Albanian origin that was Slavicized after they joined the Orthodox Church. They were located to the south of Podgorica, precisely where the village of
Mataguži is today, whose current inhabitants are therefore most likely descended to a large extent from the "tribe" itself, assuming it reached such a stage of development, which is not mentioned in the primary sources.
Krisitor (
talk) 12:25, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- your original research on the Mataguzi while interesting is irrelevant to this talk page. If you have sources which describe the Mataguzi as a Slavic speaking tribe in 1516 then I think they can be included. Otherwise why not include the Illyrian and Slavic tribes which existed in the area historically? Not really helpful to any reader.
Alltan (
talk) 15:12, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- We include the medieval tribes of Zeta in this template because it was at this time that tribes, in the sense of pleme, or fis if you prefer, came into being, that's all. As such,
Illyrian tribes and
Slavic tribes are
WP:OFFTOPIC and can't be used as an argument to remove late medieval tribes of present-day Montenegro. Regarding the Mataguži, that they joined the Orthodox Church is well documented, this is not
WP:OR, and that they are in part the ancestors of the current inhabitants of the village of the same name is also attested in several sources and even remembered by the Kuči.
Krisitor (
talk) 17:41, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- You have not provided the sources which are necessary to permit the inclusion of such tribes in this template. The template is called tribes of Montenegro, not medieval tribes of Zeta. I will revert your edit.
Alltan (
talk) 17:44, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- You didn't provide any good reason not to keep the template the way it has been for years, you didn't reach
WP:CONSENSUS, and Wikipedia is based on consensus.
Krisitor (
talk) 17:58, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- There is something called
WP:STONEWALLING. You have failed to provide sources refering to any of the disputed tribe's as existing in tribal form after 1516. This is the criteria upon which this template is built.
Alltan (
talk) 18:01, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- I set out my arguments, but you didn't respond in any way, and you clearly didn't want to discuss them. And it has nothing to do with the year 1516 or any other year you may propose.
Krisitor (
talk) 18:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- The template is about tribes which existed during the historical context of the state of Montenegro, specifically tribes which were ingrained culturally and politically with the Montenegrin state. You can see no Albanian tribes are present, because they fail the
WP:SCOPE of this template. I also bear in mind that Wikipedia is
WP:NOTFORUM.
Alltan (
talk) 18:08, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
The template is about tribes which existed during the historical context of the state of Montenegro, specifically tribes which were ingrained culturally and politically with the Montenegrin state.
That's your sole WP:OPINION but that's not why the template was originally conceived. The Mataguži, Macure, Mataruge, Kriči and other pre-Slavic tribes were/are often if not always studied within the scope of Montenegrin tribes, and mostly in Yugoslav and then Serbian or Montenegrin scholarship. I even remember reading a Studia Albanica article from the 1980s in which the Mataguži were presented as an old "Montenegrin tribe". And of course, none of these tribes is Montenegrin per se, however, they are strongly tied to the history of the geographical area that would eventually became Montenegro. As such, there is no need to remove them from the template. Krisitor ( talk) 11:54, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- The template is about tribes which existed during the historical context of the state of Montenegro, specifically tribes which were ingrained culturally and politically with the Montenegrin state. You can see no Albanian tribes are present, because they fail the
WP:SCOPE of this template. I also bear in mind that Wikipedia is
WP:NOTFORUM.
Alltan (
talk) 18:08, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- I set out my arguments, but you didn't respond in any way, and you clearly didn't want to discuss them. And it has nothing to do with the year 1516 or any other year you may propose.
Krisitor (
talk) 18:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- There is something called
WP:STONEWALLING. You have failed to provide sources refering to any of the disputed tribe's as existing in tribal form after 1516. This is the criteria upon which this template is built.
Alltan (
talk) 18:01, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- You didn't provide any good reason not to keep the template the way it has been for years, you didn't reach
WP:CONSENSUS, and Wikipedia is based on consensus.
Krisitor (
talk) 17:58, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- You have not provided the sources which are necessary to permit the inclusion of such tribes in this template. The template is called tribes of Montenegro, not medieval tribes of Zeta. I will revert your edit.
Alltan (
talk) 17:44, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- We include the medieval tribes of Zeta in this template because it was at this time that tribes, in the sense of pleme, or fis if you prefer, came into being, that's all. As such,
Illyrian tribes and
Slavic tribes are
WP:OFFTOPIC and can't be used as an argument to remove late medieval tribes of present-day Montenegro. Regarding the Mataguži, that they joined the Orthodox Church is well documented, this is not
WP:OR, and that they are in part the ancestors of the current inhabitants of the village of the same name is also attested in several sources and even remembered by the Kuči.
Krisitor (
talk) 17:41, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- your original research on the Mataguzi while interesting is irrelevant to this talk page. If you have sources which describe the Mataguzi as a Slavic speaking tribe in 1516 then I think they can be included. Otherwise why not include the Illyrian and Slavic tribes which existed in the area historically? Not really helpful to any reader.
Alltan (
talk) 15:12, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- I had already checked the history and what I saw was that many changes had been made without any agreement on this discussion page. However, I agree with your point, but as far as the
Mataruge are concerned, given that they were located in the region of
Grahovo at some point, I remain dubious as to the need to remove them from this template. On the other hand, I don't see what the
Maleševci are doing in this template either, so I'll delete them. Regarding the
Mataguži, they were a community of Albanian origin that was Slavicized after they joined the Orthodox Church. They were located to the south of Podgorica, precisely where the village of
Mataguži is today, whose current inhabitants are therefore most likely descended to a large extent from the "tribe" itself, assuming it reached such a stage of development, which is not mentioned in the primary sources.
Krisitor (
talk) 12:25, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
- You can find how the status of the template evolved via the "view history" tab. The article is geographical, but it can't include tribes which didn't exist when the term Montenegro came to incorporate these areas. I can somewhat see as reasonable the inclusion of tribes which at least theoretically became part of tribes which are mentioned in the template, but tribes like
Mataguzi or
Mataruga serve no encyclopedic purpose in this template. The Mataruga were never even documented in today's Montenegro unlike their cousins in Bjelice.--
Maleschreiber (
talk) 18:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)