This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Albania History of Albania is part of the WikiProject Albania, an attempt to co-ordinate articles relating to Albania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.AlbaniaWikipedia:WikiProject AlbaniaTemplate:WikiProject AlbaniaAlbania articles History This template is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles

This template is, content-wise, the same as Template:Histalbania. One of the two should be merged into the other. Constantine ✍ 14:07, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe to put Serbian occupation of Albania in this template? --Mladifilozof (talk) 19:45, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article Albania in the Balkan Wars should be placed before (above) articles about declaring Albania independent and before article about provisional government that was created, because Balkan Wars started about two months before those events.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From some reason Roman Empire and Ottoman Empire are excluded from the list of Empires that Albania was under. There is list of empires that Albania was under:

1. Albania under the Byzantine Empire
2. Albania under the Bulgarian Empire
3. Albania under the Serbian Empire

And from some reason there are three empires that are excluded from this list of empires that Albania was under. One is Roman Empire, second is Venetian Empire and other is Ottoman Empire. From some reason periods when Roman Empire, Venetians or Ottoman Empire controlled territory that today belongs to Albania were named differently:

1. Illyricum (Roman province)
2. Venetian Albania
3. Ottoman Albania

What is the reason for such different treatment of Empires? Maybe using term under is against NPOV and can suggest that Albania had special subordinate treatment in Byzantine, Bulgarian and Serbian Empire and not in Roman, Venetian or Ottoman Empire? Maybe it would be good to rename those articles to:

1. Roman Albania
2. Bulgarian Albania
3. Serbian Albania

or:

1. Albania under the Roman Empire
2. Albania under the Venetian Empire
3. Albania under the Ottoman Empire

--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:49, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Each article is different. You may be right, but you can't change the template: you should rather rename the articles first. Besokontrollo (talk) 08:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do get Antidiskriminator's point, but I don't really have a problem with the current naming. IMO however, there is another issue altogether that should be raised first: while Ottoman Albania is well-documented, and Venetian Albania is a distinct collection of territories, Byzantine, Bulgarian and Serbian rule are less distinct. For instance, the coats was usually Byzantine and the hinterland Slavic/Bulgarian until the 11th century. The "Serbian Empire" was short-lived, and the Serbian princes that rules over Albania after its collapse intermarried with Italians, Greeks, Bulgarians, etc. IMO, this distinction between the medieval empires is artificial and hence flat-out wrong: Albania did not abruptly transit between one empire to the next. It was usually contested territory, and people and institutions were often carried from the one empire into the other. Merging these into a "Medieval Albania" article that would encompass the period from the 7th century to the 14th is perhaps a better solution. Constantine ✍ 09:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, this distinction between the modern states is also artificial and hence flat-out wrong, but we can not change reality.

There are many templates about history of different European states and their territories. All those templates are basically list of all states (from ancient to modern) that controlled territory that today belongs to certain European state, with important events (like wars). By merging only those articles which describe period when Albania was part of three empires with majority of Orthodox Christian population would not solve above mentioned POV issue of naming policy. On the contrary. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, why exactly? Constantine ✍ 18:16, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All templates about history of different European states and their territories are basically list of all states (from ancient to modern) that that territory belonged to. I think that it is quite clear that it would be against NPOV not to follow this principle and to merge only articles about empires with majority of Orthodox Christian population that Albania belonged to. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:34, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this template is probably the only template about history of certain European state and it's territory that contains article about origin of people of one ethnicity. I propose to delete origin part from this template.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:08, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit one user complained about using painting of Skanderbeg in this template. He stated that he believes that it is against WP:MOSICON and WP:ICONDECORATION. I am not very experienced user and I am not sure if I can interpret those rules properly. If the use of Skanderbeg in this template is appropriate and if it does not violate the WP rules I propose to think about using another image of Skanderbeg instead of the existing. In the existing image Skanderbeg is pictured like Catholic priest (with barret (flat cap worn by Roman Catholic ecclesiastics) under his hat), in clothes that resembles the clothes of Catholic priest and with inscription on Latin. Not only that majority of the people could not recognize him in this image, but it could mislead readers to believe that he was a priest. Big part (maybe even major) of his life he was not even a Catholic, but Muslim and Orthodox. He never was a Catholic priest. Therefore, if there is consensus to have image of Skanderbeg in this template, and if it does not violate above mentioned WP rules, I propose to put some other image that would resemble Skanderbeg.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:31, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here I found basis for my proposal for new picture for template of History of Albania..

Any comments? --Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be Apollonia, a Greek city abandoned in early middle ages. Not too significant in Albanian history, it didn't have much role while Shkodër and Durrës for eg. are far more significant. Scanderbeg portrait is more ok IMO. He is the main figure of Albanians Aigest (talk) 10:02, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let us try to find solution that would not be "more ok" but as perfect as possible. Any other proposals (or better pictures of Skanderbeg) are more than welcome. What about Rozafa? Picture is not perfect, but some user from Shkodra could make better picture?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:22, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is not too representative, just a legend. Scanderbeg is perfect for that matter. His flag is also the official flag and he is the only national hero (not people's hero like the other figures) P.S. IMO Turkish wiki don't put Scanderbeg there for obvious reasons:) Aigest (talk) 10:45, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"...if there is consensus to have image of Skanderbeg in this template, and if it does not violate above mentioned WP rules, I propose to put some other image that would resemble Skanderbeg. " On this image he looks like Doge of Venice with latin inscription and more resembles catholic priest than himself. It is strange that we do not mind Venetian and Catholic clothes with Latin inscription, but we do mind Apolonia being Greek city once upon the time. We do not mind that Shkoder and Durres also belonged to many other empires and states before they became part of state Albania. Every city in Balkan was once upon the time part of Roman Empire, or many other. Doge of Venice with Latin inscription is much less connected to Albania than picture on Turkish wiki.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how you come to this conclusions?! Durrachium was also a Greek founded city and I do mentioned it above as alternative. I have no problem at all with that, if you have you should explain yourself. Apollonia is not significant in the history of Albania since it was abandoned in the early medieval age, while Durrës (Durrachium) and Shkodër (Scodra) were far more significant historically speaking (too much events in those areas) and continue to be inhabited cities. As for Scanderbeg I would also like to tell you that those clothes were for nobles in middle ages. To give them religious or ethnic meanings is nonsense. Anyway I don't mind if you find another Scanderbeg picture. Aigest (talk) 09:19, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let us be civil and avoid using words like "nonsense" in comments on the talk pages. I don't agree that it is a inappropriate to give religious meaning to clothes worn by Catholic priests or Venetian character to clothes worn by Doge of Venice with Latin inscription by the picture. Here is a link to the Webster dictionary which describes the hat on Skanderbeg's head on the painting that is used for template about history of state of Albania: "A square cap worn by ecclesiastics of the Roman Catholic Church. A cardinal's berretta is scarlet...". Scarlet is " bright red color with a hue that is somewhat toward the orange." If one follow the link to Doge of Venice he can see that they also wear white cap with chin straps, like those on the painting.

Even if those same clothes were worn by Christian nobles in middle ages it is not appropriate to connect it with history of Albania with majority Muslim population. Of course we should find another, appropriate picture. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Antid. please read WP:OR about your deductions regarding what's appropriate.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 12:01, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OR : "This means that all material added to articles must be attributable to a reliable published source, even if not actually attributed."

This is template's talk page, not article's. I provided sources and arguments for my proposal to change picture within this template.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:57, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent) Antid please don't go OR-ing. Scanderbeg is the main figure and easy recognizable. As for the fact of being Christian figure in a (nowadays) majority Moslem population, I don't see the point of your argument, because it is outside the topic context. FYI even the figure of Rozafa or the picture of Apollonia reflect pagan times, by your logic would be also not appropriate. If you don't like the "christian" hat find another picture with the helmet and end this discussion. Aigest (talk) 14:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing in my proposal, written on this template's talk page, that can be described as OR. It is not important if I like or don't like the "christian" hat or if I mind or not mind if Greeks founded some cities in Albania or anything else that is off-topic.

I am sure that I was clear when I stated: "If the use of Skanderbeg in this template is appropriate and if it does not violate the WP rules I propose to think about using another image of Skanderbeg instead of the existing. In the existing image Skanderbeg is pictured like Catholic priest (with barret (flat cap worn by Roman Catholic ecclesiastics) under his hat), in clothes that resembles the clothes of Catholic priest and with inscription on Latin. Not only that majority of the people could not recognize him in this image, but it could mislead readers to believe that he was a priest."--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:05, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That Skanderbeg was christian is of no importance, I am yet to hear of any Albanian not accepting him as the national symbol. Also, I am not aware that the image you mention can't be identified by many Albanians, therefore I would prefer that image to be used here, in any case Kruja.jpg (left) is another good choice --Cradel (talk) 00:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that I never claimed that:

1. Albanians don't accept Skanderbeg as the national hero
2. Albanians are not able to identify the image
3. That it is important that Skanderbeg was Christian

Thank you for very nice picture. When I saw it I said wow. It is really fantastic. But I think that maybe the best way is to follow the example of the teplates of history of other European countries. Here everyone can see that the in almost all cases the picture in the template is either coat of arms or flag.

Based on above mentioned explanations and based on the good practice in other templates I propose to replace the picture of Skandebeg with the picture of coat of arms.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:23, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is obviously not only much better corresponding to other European countries histories templates, but also much better looking choice.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:36, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the template is fine as is. And why do you think that those are priest clothes, Antidiskriminator? --Brunswick Dude (talk) 06:43, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I already provided sources and links that support my proposal in my comments within this section: definition of the clothes from the dictionary, links to the articles which explain my opinion, complaint of another user and what is the practice in other templates (about the history of European states and the picture in tr.wiki). De gustibus non est disputandum. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:29, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

History of Albania

Prehistory Prehistoric Balkans Antiquity Illyria Illyrians Macedonia (Roman province) Illyricum Middle Ages Albania in the Middle Ages Albania under the Byzantine Empire Albania under the Bulgarian Empire Albania under the Serbian Empire Principality of Arbër Kingdom of Albania Albanian Principalities League of Lezhë Venetian Albania Ottoman Albania Ottoman Albania Albanian Pashaliks Massacre of the Albanian beys Albanian National Awakening Revolts of 1833-1839 Revolt of 1843-1844 Revolt of 1847 League of Prizren League of Peja Revolt of 1910 Battle of Deçiq Revolt of 1912 Albanian Declaration of Independence Post-Independence Provisional Government Balkan Wars Principality of Albania Republic of Central Albania Republic of Korçë Republic of Mirdita Vlora War Albanian Republic Albanian Kingdom Albania under Italy Albania under Germany Albanian Resistance Liberation of Albania Communist Albania Contemporary Albania Post-Communism 1997 unrest Republic of Albania

This box: view talk edit

{{doc}}

There is a gap of more than 300 years within section about Ottoman Albania. I propose to fill this gap with following articles which describe high level administrative units of Ottoman Empire which establishing started after first Ottoman conquests in Albania:

• Albanian Sanjak
• Sanjak of Shkoder
• Sanjak of Debar
• Shkodër Vilayet
• Ioannina Vilayet
• any other high level administrative unit (sanjak or villayet) of Ottoman Empire that existed on the territory of modern Albania.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:01, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You done an outstanding job: I will enter these administrative entities in the template.Yllke shembullore (talk) 14:32, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:12, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]