| Revision as of 05:44, 20 April 2015 editResnjari (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users27,440 edits →IMPORTANT DELETION OF SOURCES IN THE CHAM ALBANIANS ARTICLE BY ALEXIKOUA- Need assistance: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:50, 20 April 2015 edit undoResnjari (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users27,440 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| Hi ZjarriRrethues | Hi ZjarriRrethues | ||
| Recently i rewrote part of the article in relation to the Cham Albanians, by adding many important (western) sources that have not been accessible to many. They are by Western scholars who have done fieldwork in Thesprotia, accessed the Greek government archive, non impartial nineteenth century observers of the situation. In the article i included sources that one were not Albanian (as Albanian sources are accused of being biased and in-factual by Greek editors). I included in the article, academics that were importantly of Greek heritage. I also included in the footnotes the relevant pieces of information of where that information came from to prevent a deletion and have a serious discussion. Yet when i came to the article, all i saw was complete deletion !!! I was accused of POV !!! I ask, is this how wikipedia works, that when a credible source/s is given, it gets deleted without even proper discussion ? I also think my wording did not in any way produce a biased outcome. I am concerned that is this the type of quality that goes on wikipedia ? I am currently in postgraduate studies, and stifling of discussion is unacceptable. It’s about scholarly debate. I still don't understand how i was pushing POV. For example, in the section about Chams today in Greece, i came across sources that have encountered Orthodox Albanian speaking populations. There also still exists a Albanian Muslim Cham community. Yet that got deleted. Voltaire once said "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it". I asked Alexikoua to justify each and everyone one of her deletions ? Otherwise she is pushing POV ! I request your assistance for ] page. The same thing happened with the ] page. Please see both as you are a very experienced editor. | |||
| ] (]) 05:44, 20 April 2015 (UTC) | ] (]) 05:44, 20 April 2015 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 05:50, 20 April 2015
You have a message
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Onufri, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Venetian school (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.
thanks.... begzada
thanks for helping Begzada page.... --BeyPeople (talk)-- 18:54, 27 sep 2012
SVG map
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
IMPORTANT DELETION OF SOURCES IN THE CHAM ALBANIANS ARTICLE BY ALEXIKOUA- Need assistance
Hi ZjarriRrethues
Recently i rewrote part of the article in relation to the Cham Albanians, by adding many important (western) sources that have not been accessible to many. They are by Western scholars who have done fieldwork in Thesprotia, accessed the Greek government archive, non impartial nineteenth century observers of the situation. In the article i included sources that one were not Albanian (as Albanian sources are accused of being biased and in-factual by Greek editors). I included in the article, academics that were importantly of Greek heritage. I also included in the footnotes the relevant pieces of information of where that information came from to prevent a deletion and have a serious discussion. Yet when i came to the article, all i saw was complete deletion !!! I was accused of POV !!! I ask, is this how wikipedia works, that when a credible source/s is given, it gets deleted without even proper discussion ? I also think my wording did not in any way produce a biased outcome. I am concerned that is this the type of quality that goes on wikipedia ? I am currently in postgraduate studies, and stifling of discussion is unacceptable. It’s about scholarly debate. I still don't understand how i was pushing POV. For example, in the section about Chams today in Greece, i came across sources that have encountered Orthodox Albanian speaking populations. There also still exists a Albanian Muslim Cham community. Yet that got deleted. Voltaire once said "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it". I asked Alexikoua to justify each and everyone one of her deletions ? Otherwise she is pushing POV ! I request your assistance for Cham Albanians page. The same thing happened with the Ioannina page. Please see both as you are a very experienced editor.