Talk:Tetovo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

I find it really sad that although this is an Albanian populated city, the article here only mentions Albanians once. Clearly Macedonian Slavs are scarred of their dwindling pipulation and disputed national identity, so they write propaganda pieces like this one.


You have the same notice on the stub at the bottom. All that notice does is make the article more ugly. Dori | Talk 13:26, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Aesthetically, I agree with you, but since this is the way it's done when expansion is requested, I'd put content over aesthetics. Anyway, thanks for trying to make this article more beautiful. :) Etz Haim 19:13, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I keep seeing the name Ami Bue on pages related to Macedonian cities. I know he was a French doctor and traveler who took rough estimates of the population in major Macedonian cities, but a full page would require more information. If you have any additional information on him, it would be appreciated as I'd like to start a page on him. freestylefrappe 21:34, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)

Albanian is official, and there is significant Turkish minority, so they will be listed along with Macedonian language! Mr. Neutron 13:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian language is official[edit]

See here!. 60886 Albanians out of 86580 people, more than 20% and Albanian is official! Mr. Neutron 14:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Ok, but as the Macedonian is primary language at national level, I'm suggesting a compromise, in the intro we would mention the Macedonian as the primary language, and in the Name section we would put both the Macedonian and Albanian (we can add Turkish as well). What do you think? MatriX 17:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
After the name in English, will follow Macedonian and Albanian, as those two are official in the country and most of the local population is Albanian. Mr. Neutron 17:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is ok, but as the Macedonian language is primary at national level, we can put all other relevant naming's into the Name section. MatriX 17:27, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ohrid Agreement: 6.5. Any other language spoken by at least 20 percent of the population is also an official language Mr. Neutron 17:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your forgot to write the whole text: is also an official language as specified below:... and it is strictly said that it can be used just is limited circumstances.

Check also this:[1]:

Question: U.S. reaction to Macedonia Prime Minister’s rejection of request from Albanian community to designate Albanian as the official second language for Macedonia? Is this a violation of the Ohrid Agreement?

Answer: The Government of Macedonia is in the process of preparing a language law that addresses Ohrid Framework Agreement provisions for the use of languages other than the Macedonian language. - so, as I said a hundreds times in the last days, the Albanian language is not yet accepted as the official second language for Macedonia. MatriX 17:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your interpretation. There is no need for original researching. The Ohrid agreement was signed and is in effect. Therefore per 6.5, Albanian is official. Show me an official document by the government in Skopje which says the Ohrid agreement is annulled. Mr. Neutron 18:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Ohrid agreement is in place and the Macedonian is still retained as the primary official language at national level.MatriX 18:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Who are you to say? Do not make things up. Show a document which says the Ohrid agreement is not valid? If it is valid Albanian is official. Mr. Neutron 18:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


How come the population in Tetovo is 75% macedonian with 20% albanian.I've been the and you hardly see macedonians in Tetovo.I find alot of articles wrong in wikipedia and that's very sad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Usawashington2 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think many people can know someone's ethnicity just by looking at them. --Justmakingonearcticle 22:07, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POV?[edit]

This article is clearly written by "macedonian" propagandist, if there is such a term. The desperation of these people stealing others' identity is quite sad. It's a shame how Wikipedia's lack of neutrality and concise information has increased. Yet another reason why its being shunned as research material. --Ptoleme (talk) 04:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this article was created by a Greek user, Etz Haim. --Justmakingonearcticle 21:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bread and circuses[edit]

Proof that this pronunciation is common for the Bulgarian dialectal space (call it the Bulgarian-Macedonian diasystem): [2]. Besides hlyab, variants in folk songs include hleb, leb, lyap and lep. Todor→Bozhinov

Explicitly tie this to the main point. BalkanFever 14:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that Tito is dead. Todor→Bozhinov 16:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To Ddirec[edit]

Thank you that at least you described two of your changes in the articles Tetovo and Strumica. :) Maybe the reason of your silence until now is that you aren't many familiar with the rules of Wikipedia, but some of your edits can be defined as a typical form of vandalism.
Concerning your note: "when you cite 'relevant' census sources, please explain how the census was contucted" I would be glad to answer: The source (which wasn't cited by me first) isn't a census in contemporary form. Nobody asserts this. You can see: "According to the statistics of..." It is a research by geographer Vasil Kanchov made in the end of XIX century and published in 1900. It was made on the basis of the official Ottoman statistics and according to the data by local municipalities. Therefore the number of the population is round - 9,000 Turks, 8,500 Bulgarians, 1,200 Roma etc. This is the only way of statistics in these times in Ottoman empire and the research by Kanchov is one of the best in respect of region of Macedonia.--Males (talk) 15:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


To Males[edit]

The basis of Ottoman censuses was the Millet system. People were assigned to ethnicity according to which religion they belonged. So all Sunni Muslims were categorised as Turks, all members of Greek Orthodox church as Greeks although it included vaste majority of Aromanians and certain number of Macedonian Slavs, while the rest being divided between Bulgarian and Serbian Orthodox churches. Tetovo is a city which has always had a serbian minority, in Ottoman times, and even today. That is not mentioned in the 'source'. In second citation: "According to the statistics of the secretary of the Bulgarian Exarchate Dimitar Mishev in 1905 the population of the town consists of 7,408 Bulgarians and 30 Roma" the other ethnicities (like Turks and Serbs) are left out. What it means is that the Bulgarian Exarchate has that many members in Tetovo, but the way it is stated, it gives the wrong impression that that's the number of citizens of Tetovo. As for Bulgarian sources, I have to say, their objectivity is a bit questionable. Some bulgarian authors say that everyone who spoke a slavic language in Ottoman Macedonia were Bulgarian (which may or may not be true). The 'relevant' sources cited are misleading. I think it's best not to post such stories until the controversy is in some way resolved. Or if posted, it should be explained that it does not imply ethnicity. The first census that included ethnicity was conducted in Tetovo after WWII (I'm not sure about the date). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddirec (talk • contribs) 15:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ddirec, it is very interesting to me: "Tetovo is a city which has always had a serbian minority, in Ottoman times". Always in Ottoman times? If you bothered to read the Kanchov statistics (here, p. 215) you can see that he relies on the statistics by Serbian author Stefan Verkovich, too. In his statistics and in the other his book Verkovich didn't mention Serbian population in the region of Tetovo in late 19th century. However, if you have other statistics, with the concrete numbers of some Serbians in Tetovo in end of 19th century (or later) It would be greet to point them in the article.
Concerning to the data of Mishev(Brankov) and your notice that he didn't mention Turks in Tetovo, please note that the name of his book is "La Macédoine et sa Population Chrétienne". I am sure that you don't claim that there were Tucs Christians in this part of Ottoman Empire. Maybe the correct wording in "According to the statistics of the secretary of the Bulgarian Exarchate Dimitar Mishev in 1905 the population of the town consists of 7,408 Bulgarians and 30 Roma" is to add: "According to the statistics of christian population ....".
Nobody prevents you to specify in the text of the article that these two statistics are Bulgarian. This way you can bring conditionality, which you need, without deleting of valuable historical information on the past of the town.--Males (talk) 16:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I keep saying under 'Ottoman times' (maybe its more correct to say Ottoman period) because the fragment I deleted was placed in that section, 'Ottoman period'. The way the sentence was formulated, as you can see for yourself, it says 'the population of the town' which is misleading. As you said before, that particular author uses statistics from Ottoman census, so I think if such things are posted, it should be correctly explained what that means. It is clear from your explanation that you know all this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddirec (talk • contribs) 17:06, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My objections concerning the statement "Tetovo is a city which has always had a Serbian minority, in Ottoman times" isn't related with "Ottoman times", but with "always" and the lack of some evidences. The particular authors, mentioned above, didn't use Ottoman censuses (we both know that there aren’t such censuses), but the Otoman salnames. I translated the word "salname" as "statistics", but even this translation isn't enough correct. I'll repeat that the salname in any case is not census. It provides only the basic data about population, the holidays etc. The authors (Kanchov, Mishev and why not Verkovich) made particular (remarkable in my oppinion :)) researches on the spot and as I pointed, one of their sources was the data provided by local communities.
Are you agree to specify in “According the statistics of Vasil Kanchov in 1900 the population of Tetovo consists of ...…” ““According the statistics of the Bulgarian ethnographer Vasil Kanchov in 1900 the population of Tetovo consists of …”?--Males (talk) 17:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian town[edit]

I've put it down in the article as an Albanian town on the ground that it has an Albanian majority who lived in the town both before the town was conquered by Macedonia and before the Macedonians arrived. The Albanian majority there is a reminder of this period. I'm not saying that the town is in Albania, I mean it is Albanian by people and by deserved right for where it should be and who it ought to belong to. Human Rights Believer (talk) 15:12, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide reliable (non-Albanian and non-Macedonian, preferably) sources proving this. Alæxis¿question? 18:14, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No source could provide satisfactory details to support the comment made by HRB. We do not use the demonym of the majority population to indicate what a city is. We don't say "Kirkuk is a Kurdish city", nor do we even say "Iraqi city", it is simply a "city in Iraq" and that is the principle which applies everywhere. Evlekis (talk) 21:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't say that to me :) Alæxis¿question? 06:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, our friend who is so concerned for human rights will not be making any contributions here for a while. He has achieved himself a topic ban, see his talk!! Evlekis (talk) 23:09, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lede[edit]

Made this edit [3] in light of the discussion here. --Sulmues (talk) 16:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Oldtetovo4.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Oldtetovo4.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Media without a source as of 1 July 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:38, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic background[edit]

IP 151.250.11.178 needs a reliable source to support their additions about ethnic background of the city. The source they have used so far is not reliable. Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:42, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the addition is supported by facts from the body of the article. Tetovo obviously has a Turkish background being under the Ottoman Empire for centuries and it still has a sizable Turkish minority. I think the sentence is meant to communicate that, despite the centre of Macedonia's Albanian community, Tetovo is a very ethnically-mixed city with a history involving multiple groups of people. --Local hero talk 16:34, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that IP user has persistently disrupted with their edits. The lead needs some work and the whole article more material and coverage. A mention of Turkish element in Tetovo means that Vlachs are also to be mentioned as they are a traditional ethnic group and recent years have outnumbered Turks. The sentence user added is to be discussed because if we mention a Turkish background on this article then the same background is to be mentioned on every single article about settlements in those part of the Balkans that were under Ottoman Empire more than a century ago. The Turkish element has not played a major role in the history of Tetovo and as such word "background" seems not to be relevant. The lead also should inlude a few words about ancient past of the settlement and its importance in the Albanian nationalism. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:51, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A better lead would certainly be helpful. I don't see any evidence that Vlachs are now or have ever been a significant minority in Tetovo by looking at the article. We could add a quick summary of the demographics saying that Albanians now form over half, while Macedonians make up over one-third and that Turks once formed over one-fifth of the population as recently as 1961 but are now under 4%. We should also summarise the history and maybe mention the important sites in the city like Šarena Džamija and Arabati Baba Tekje. --Local hero talk 14:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish Majority Until 1900's[edit]

between 14th - 19th Century Town was part of the ottoman empire unlike albania,bosnia,romania region etc in the macedonia-kosova region along with the cities Tetova(Turkish:Kalkandelen) skopje (Turkish:Üsküp) prizen(kosova) turkish etnicity reached high levels thanks to high level of turkish migration to the area from anatolia. so we have to mention it in the background. The bulk of migration happened after collapse of karamanids with Afshar people.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Tetovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:11, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tetovo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:55, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:11, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tetovo/Oaneon/Oaneum[edit]

I can not find any reliable source that confirms with certainty the identity of the two cities - that of antiquity and the modern.

Can someone explain this to me or help me orient myself in the situation. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 12:15, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I find info that the town was founded during 13-14th century in Thammy Evans, Philip Briggs, Bradt Travel Guides, 2019, North Macedonia-p. 164. Jingiby (talk) 12:54, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

locally in Tetovo as Tavë me Groshë.[edit]

This is inaccurate. Locals also use Tavce Gravce as stated earlier. 14.202.229.132 (talk) 04:32, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Name, etymology and continuity[edit]

I have seen several problems with the article on Tetovo regarding its name, most of the website uses anacrhonistic language, saying that Oaeneum was conquered by the Ottomans (which i deleted) or that Oaeneum was ruled at alternate times by Illyrian Kings and all the way up to Skenderbeg (which i deleted) none of these had citations, in most of the article it is implied Oaeneum and Tetovo are one and the same, or at least the reader is led to that conclussion, but then we have the citations that say that Tetovo was founded in the 14th century and that previously during the Slavic-Avar invasions all fortresses were abandonded. Logically this means the city of Oaeneum died during or before the Slavic invasions and Tetovo was founded in or near its place roughly some 800+ years later which brings me to the issue of etymology.

The earliest records mention the city name as Htetovo and in the sources i previously added but were deleted it stated that the origin was Slavic and that it came from the verb "hteti" or want/desirable with the Slavic suffix -vo denoting a place ie a "Desirable place" this entry was deleted because apparently this was a "folk" etymology which it certinaly isn't, even if it was a folk etymology it doesn't mean people should not at least know about it yet it was deleted and nobody has ever added any citations or sources that disprove this claim or add another claim in its place.

My question is how do we clarify the Oaeneum - Tetovo continuity problem and i would like someone to explain to me why my sources were deleted even tho the person that deleted them agreed the origin was most likely Slavic. Are people not supposed to see etymologies just because they may or may not be folk etymologies? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoofyMF (talk • contribs) 15:53, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sources: Madegaru, Iseni Baskhim and Iljaz Rexha[edit]

I need clarification on these sources they have been added in several parts of the Tetovo wiki indication an Albanian presence in the city of Tetovo from the middle ages onwards.

First the Madegaru source says that Albanians were recorded in Tetovo in the defter of 1455 which would be the defter for the district of Brankovic, but when i checked the defter the corresponding wikipedia page it says that the defter does not denote nationality in the census itself and that according to the names 96.3% of the names were of Slavic origin and 0.26% were Albanian. The article also implies that Madegaru is in disagreement and that according to him the defter shows a significant presence of Albanians and some in Tetovo. This is clearly open for interpretation and if the fact that only 0.26% of the names were of Albanian origin in the whole district why the emphasis on Albanian names in the wiki? Should we not also add beside it that the vast majority of them were Slavic? This ties in to the second problem.

Second the Iljaz Rexha source claims that there were names of Muslim and Christian Albanian origin in the defters in Tetovo of 1467 but the vast majority of the Christian names he claims are Albanian are of Slavic origin like "Bozhidar, Stojan, Ivan, Kovac, Radic, Jovan etc" this in itself makes the source unreliable, when i pointed this out to the editor he removed the Slavic names and only left the minority of names that are of Albanian origin or of general Christian/Greek/Latin origin and implied some of them were Slavicized. This ties in with the first question, why the emphasis on Albanian names and Albanian presence in the article. The wikipedia article sounds like it only focuses on Albanians and completely ignores Slavic presence in Tetovo even in cases like the 1455 defter "Some Albanians were present" this is a very roundabout way of Saying "most inhabitants were not Albanian"

Thirdly the Iseni Bashkim source claims entire Albanian villages were given to the monastery of Tetovo by Tsar Dushan but i cannot find any other source denoting the ethnicity of the villages nor is it clear if the villages itself were near Tetovo or in Albania or Kosovo which are all near the border i want to ask for clarification on this issue. GoofyMF (talk) 15:47, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The defters did not record ethnicity, but I believe historians like Madgearu use the names recorded to attempt to determine ethnic origin. Where have you found the 96.3%/0.26% numbers?
Regarding the Bashkim source, it is via Peter Lang Publishing which has a mixed reputation at best. --Local hero talk 05:05, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware that names are used to gauge ethnicity from the defters but my issue is how open names are to interpretation especially considering the Albanian sources in the article routinely used Slavic names as examples of Albanian names. As for the 96% it's from the wiki page on the District of Brankovic i didn't check the citations
GoofyMF (talk) 15:48, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to Local Hero for clarifying that, indeed, many respectable historians utilise the onomastics and naming anthropology within the defters to determine ethnicity. First of all - the numbers you have proposed about percentages are unsourced, so let's not acknowledge that. In regards to the anthropology, let's use Dimitri son of Prenko as an example; Dimitri is indeed a Slav Orthodox name, but his father, Prenko, retains a characteristically Albanian name, so experts interpret this as someone of an Orthodox Albanian heritage. We can also use Jovash, son of Prena, as an example; Prena is a characteristically Albanian name, regardless of his son's name. Therefore, they too must be Albanian. Do not forget many Albanians in the Middle Ages were converted to the Orthodox faith by the rulers of the Slavic states that conquered them, hence why they utilised Slav Orthodox names. Some of these names you claim to be "Christian/Greek/Latin" origin are rooted in the Albanian language, others are Albanised versions of Christian names; it is the equivalent of names like Vasil, Aleksandar, Danilo etc in Slavic languages - Christian names not rooted in Slavic, yet they are Slavicised versions. That clears up the Rexha and Madgearu source.
In regards to Iseni's source, which is WP:RS, he states that Albanian villages were indeed given to the monasteries of Tetova, Prizren and Deçan; the existence of Albanian/Vlach villages in these regions during these times is a fact, and the Tsars would sometimes make mention of these Albanian or Vlach villages. Furthermore, the donation of villages as fiefs to monasteries was a pretty common occurrence during the Middle Ages. Not sure what the issue is.
Now, about your question regarding the prevalence of Albanians within this article; if you did not know, Tetova and the Pollog Valley region in general currently are and historically have been inhabited by an Albanian majority, so it makes sense that their existence is mentioned more heavily considering the fact that they form said majority. Furthermore, many of the sources discuss the Albanians of Tetova; the sources may not focus on the Slavs of Tetova. There is nothing wrong with that. It is not the fault of other Wikipedia editors if there is a lack of reputable sources on Slavic inhabitants in the region, or if they just simply have not been placed on the article. If you simply do not like Albanians, just say it and avoid creating unnecessary TP's questioning why an article focuses on the specific population that makes up the majority of the settlement and its surroundings. It's a pretty logical phenomenon. Botushali (talk) 06:02, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dmitri is not a Slavic name it's Greek in origin but it's a Slavic version of a Greek name. As for Prenko i checked the name on forebearers and the highest incidence of the name is in Croatia, and the highest surname incidence is in Russia. This obviously isn't definitive proof nor is the name Prenko itslef relevant to the general discussion. My issue with the names was firstly:
1. An Albanian source lists a majority of either Greek/Latin or Slavic names and represents them as Albanian without any proof
2. When i pointed this out the Slavic names were removed because they were obviously wrong and only the supposedly Albanian names were retained with the caveat now that the remaining Slavic names were the result of Slavicization
a) Where is proof of Slavicization?
b) It's obvious the defter lists plenty of names both Slavic and Albanian but the wiki editor removes the Slavic names focusing solely on the Albanian ones when simply stating "Slavic and Albanians names were recorded in the defter..." would be sufficient
This is why i ask for a quote in the source to see if the author is the one making the claim of Slavicization
Also regarding the mixes of Slavic/Albanian names within a family, you are making the assumption that they are obviously Albanian based on the Albanian names when i can also say "Jovan is a Slavic version of a name so they must have been Slavic regardless of the fathers name" etc, you also claim that this is proof of Slavicization which as a political ideology does not belong in the middle ages when territory was not justified by ethnicity but simply by force, the much more probable reason for these cases of mixed Slavic/Albanian names within families is because the families were of mixed Slavic and Albanian origin as people tend to intermarry in close proximity and usually when of a single faith as it was in 1455
As for the villages you claim it's a fact I'm simply asking for a quote from the book which clarifies where it is stated they were Albanian and that they were from Tetovo they could have been from what is today Kosovo which is very near Tetovo or from Albania proper the issue isn't that villages were given to monasteries but i simply asked for clarification since i cannot buy or find a pdf version of the book itself, i would have otherwise checked myself
I know a lot about Tetovo and the Polog valley considering practically my entire family is from there, Albanians being a majority there historically is very, very disputed, but that's not an argument i want to start, i do not mind this article containing the history of the Tetovo Albanians, Albanian contribution to the city of Tetovo cannot and should not be erased, the issue is the citations used here clearly also mention a large Slavic presence which is erased such as the fact that the name Tetovo is of Slavic origin, the etymology section i made was repeatedly deleted because the assumption was the etymology was a folk etymology, i wasn't aware wikipedia didn't allow folk etymologies firstly and secondly i didn't know wikipedia editors were the arbiters of what is and isn't considered a folk etymology.
And i would kindly ask you not to insult me by pretending this is some sort of personal vendetta or a supposed dislike of Albanians, i have found plenty of cases of unreliable and in some places downright invented opinions on Macedonian cities and history being interpreted as fact, such as the attempts to edit the etymology of Struga as a supposed Albanian origin without a single source mentioning the name of the city while cited articles saying it was Slavic were removed, i am simply trying to make sure the article isn't biased and that certain sources aren't taken out of context by simply providing quotes from the sources. I have not asked or threatened to remove the sources i simply asked for clarification.
Sorry for the long reply i just wanted to make sure i was being understood
GoofyMF (talk) 16:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to find a snippet for the Bashkim source and it states: "Entire Albanian villages were given by Serb Kings, and especially Stefan Dushan, as a present to the Serb monasteries of Prizren, Decan, and Tetova".
It seems "Slavicization" is claimed when, for example, a father is named Prenko (supposedly an Albanian name) and the son has a Slavic name. But as you point out, this is based on the opinions of these historians that names like Prenko are Albanian in origin and not something else. I agree that simplicity is best and a statement like "Slavic and Albanians names were recorded in the defter." is better and more concise than listing out all the names in the text. --Local hero talk 19:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, let me clarify that the name Prenk is still used by Albanians - in Albanian, it derives from the word praj, and is predominantly used by Catholic Albanians. Nonetheless, this is not about the etymology of the name Prenk.
1. The user who added the Slavic names (Surix) was edited by the user Alltan, and rightfully so - names like "Niko, son of Jovani" are not indicative of Albanian origin whatsoever.
2. The sources discussed and their authors identify cases of Slavicization when there is a father with a generic Albanian name (Prena, Marin, Dula Arbanas, Arbanas, Gjon, Ulkos etc) that has a son with a generic Slavic/Slav Orthodox name.
3. The Slavic names must've been omitted in those recent edits because the line prior to the names states "the following Christian people of Albanian ethnicity were registered...". Then again, I did not make the edit, so it is better to ask them.
4. Iljaz Rexha begins his section like this: "Në vijim po sjellim dëshmi arkivore për sllavizimin e antroponisë shqiptare dhe praninë e popullsisë shqiptare në hapsirën e Maqedonisë." Indeed, it seems the authors do truly make the claim of Slavicisation.
5. Your point about ignoring the name of one's father in cases like this is invalid. The political climate must be understood; Albanians did not have a significant political Albanian state or entity in the area at this time, nor did they manage the Orthodox Church which was dominated by Slavic influence, so they did not have the ability to facilitate large-scale assimilation of neighbouring peoples. When you have a father with a generic Catholic Albanian name, yet all his sons retain Slav Orthodox names, it is fair to say the family is being Slavicised as is discussed by Rexha and many other reputable authors in similar works (such as Pulaha). Indeed, they could be from mixed Slav-Albanian families, and certain sources (such as Pulaha) distinguish between Slavic, Slavo-Albanian and Albanian anthroponomy to take such things into account, but if the sources used here do not say this, we cannot simply make inferences from said sources. Wiki editors cannot craft their own conclusions from the sources that are cited.
6. Thanks again to Local Hero for finding the snippet.
7. Anecdotes are not valid or useful on Wikipedia, so simply stating that the Pollog Valley being inhabited by an Albanian majority historically is heavily disputed since you have family in the region really does not matter. If you have sources that comply with WP:RS to back up these claims (including the "only 0.26% of the names were of Albanian origin in the whole district" you have yet to provide a valid source for), feel free to incorporate them.
8. I have not interfered in the etymology section - the way I see it, no matter the root of where it comes from, the toponym 'Tetova' is quite probably of Slavic origin. Perhaps taking the folklore etymology discussion up with editors who actually were involved with that would be more suitable.
9. I am not insulting you - you have made it abundantly clear you take issue with the predominance of Albanians within articles such as this and Upper Reka. Many of these sources focus on the Albanian presence in the region, so of course they will predominantly discuss the Albanians, and I am now repeating myself by having to explain that the population group which forms a majority of a region will obviously be discussed in more detail than others on relevant articles as there would be more sources available. As I stated previously, feel free to add sources that comply with WP:RS if it will benefit the article. Everything should now be clarified and there is no need to further discuss these sources that are indeed RS. Botushali (talk) 23:52, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
1. If the user added the Slavic names it means that you were only trying to hide them, if Rexha cites them as Albanian then he really isn't much of a reliable source then is it?
2. Like I said name changes are open to interpretation I have ancestors with Greek/Latin name but for the past 4 generations all of them are Slavic this does not mean my ancestors were Greeks or Vlachs who became Slavicized and again you are ignoring the most simple explanation of intermarriage cultural exchange between people which happens a lot more often when people are of the same faith like they were back then
4. And what is the following? The names? Is he basing Slavicization on names? Because that's hardly conclusive
5. Assimilation of smaller ethnic groups is not a controversial phenomenon and all it does is prove the obvious thing I am talking about that the sources you provide clearly show far more Slavic names and Slavic influence such as the name of Tetovo/Polog regions themselves which is ignored, now as of right now we have a source that says there were Slavic names and a "sizeable" proportion of Albanian names and then only the Albanian ones are listed. Why? Why not leave it at "The period shows a large presence of Slavic and Albanian names along names of Greek and Latin etymology" the article is being turned into a defter and it can be turned into a bigger defter if someone decided to add the Slavic names there as well, my whole point here is that Albanian wikipedia editors are trying to prove a point by adding the Albanian names only.
7. I didn't say that it was disputed because i have family there lmfoa, i said i know a lot about the history of my region because im from there, and that the historical majority of the Albanians is and always will be disputed
and as for the defer % i said they were from the wiki page on the defter itself i didn't check the citations
8. That's assuming they will talk at all and not just delete my source like they did before since it was cited
9. You are, If I don't bring things like this up we would probably still have Albanian "Shtrunge" as etymology for Struga something that you yourself edited several times despite the Slavic theory having multiple citations remember even the Albanian source did not make a claim that Struga came from "Shtrunge" somebody, and i don't know who on wikipedia invented that theory by himself in order to Albanize the name of the city, so maybe instead of trying to insult me and gaslight me you should see it that i only dislike people who invent claims in order to justify modern irredentism and nationalism.
As for the reka debate Bechev mentions some villages of Albanian speakers and Mirchevska only states that the muslim population identifies as Albanian and that the Orthodox identify as Macedonian yet the upper reka introduction says that the region is home to Muslim Albanians and Christian Albanians who identify as Macedonians if this isn't a clear indication of forcing a point of view and a break of "Wiki editors cannot craft their own conclusions from the sources that are cited" then i don't know what is. Remember it seems that Albanian wiki editors are the ones using half baked theories and in some cases theories that they invented to present things as Albanian in origin not me. And even during the Struga etymology events I always left the Albanian etymology intact' and always presented both points of view yet you claim that i have a personal grudge with Albanians by your logic do the Albanian editors P(including yourslef) who removed my cited sources to only leave the Albanian etymology must hate Slavs then? I have never accused anyone of this because it's dishonest
GoofyMF (talk) 09:16, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I just checked the Upper Reka region article, please tell me how I have a personal grudge with Albanians when this was in the Upper Reka Intro "The region is home to both a Muslim Albanian community and Christian Orthodox Albanian speaking population that self identifies as Macedonians, though with some notable exceptions in past and recent times." with Mirchevska being the [2] citation implying that a Macedonian author agrees that he population was originally ethnic Albanian
When Mirchevska in the article itself states: While anthropologist Mirjana Mirčevska who did field work in Upper Reka during the 2000s, stated that both the Muslim and Orthodox population was mainly of Macedonian Slavic origin, with possible Albanian elements in their ethnogenesis and futhermore "During the 18th century Mirčevska contends the population was Islamised and Albanianized after the arrival of Catholic and Muslim Albanians from what is today Albania."
Who is misusing citations here? Who is weaving a narrative? Who is forcing a point of view? I realize this is not relevant to the Tetovo talk but i post this to silence your accusation that i have a personal grudge against Albanians when I challenge wikipedia edits like this that clearly misuse citations to force a political point.
GoofyMF (talk) 09:33, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for finding that and posting it here, this proves my suspicions that the Albanian villages could have been from Kosovo or Albania but since Tetovo is mentioned I guess its relevant to the discussion tho I personally would phrase it in a way that seems less like the villages were from Tetovo but I guess it's not that big of a deal
GoofyMF (talk) 09:18, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo[edit]

H 37.162.29.250 (talk) 12:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Liberated, annexed or seized/captured.[edit]

Let's use neutral terminology. Annexed and liberated have certain political and ethno-national connotations, while captured/seized is rather more neutral. As for the Macedonian sources, there things are somewhat biased in this case.Jingiby (talk) 05:32, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’d argue ‘annexed’ does not have ulterior connotations, but I’m fine with ‘seized’. We need to remember it was an armed occupation and various paramilitary groups in the local area also resisted, because for certain parts of the region’s population, a Macedonian partisan takeover was far from ideal. ‘Liberation’ is therefore out of the question entirely. That’s inaccurate and non-neutral - in certain cases, a term like ‘liberation’ is fine because it is in accordance with the demographic situation and the actual historic reality for the local population. In this case, a term like liberation is not suitable in the slightest. Botushali (talk) 06:35, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Annexation in the international law, is the forcible acquisition of one state's territory by another state, usually following military occupation of the territory. The case here is different. Jingiby (talk) 07:05, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed - therefore, 'seized' would be the appropriate term. 'Captured' seems to imply more temporary connotations. Botushali (talk) 07:16, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dusan barring grazing "including Albanians"[edit]

To mitigate the possibility of an edit war I am creating this talk page to discuss the supposed claim of Dusan barring everyone from grazing the fields, including the Albanians.

The citation is supposedly from page 77 of Iseni's "La question nationale en Europe du Sud-Est" (9783039113200), where he references page 56 of Noel Malcolm's "Kosovo: A Short History" (978-0060977757) whom in turn cites Stanojevic's work from 1929.

This long string of sources is enough to relegate Iseni to a secondary source, at best. However, what is interesting here is that neither on page 77 of Iseni's work, nor page 56 of Malcolm's work can you find any mention of Dusan barring the farmers from grazing and even less so a specific mention of Albanians either.

I will now remove the text from the page again as it is not only completely non-essential, but also nowhere to be found in the supposed sources. If you do find the source, please post it here to be verified.

Thanks. Skkaveola (talk) 11:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Added a source that specifically discusses Stefan Dusan barring via official decree the Albanians and Vlachs from grazing their livestock or carrying out agricultural activities in the Nanov Dol Highlands. Thanks. Botushali (talk) 12:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    He references Novakovic's work about the romanians and vlachs and likely references Nanov Dol on the Bulgarian/Romanian border as there is no Nanov Dol in Macedonia. Please stop posting sources without checking what they even say and stop adding this pointless information that is not even relevant to Tetovo, or Macedonia in general. Skkaveola (talk) 12:42, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "likely references" ok so you dont know then. That's fine, but don't remove the source before you do know. Alltan (talk) 15:43, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a work from 1929 that deals with Vlachs in Romania. The reason for the removal is that there is no Nanov Dol in Macedonia and there is no reason for it to be present on a page about Tetovo. If you can find me which Nanov Dol relates to Tetovo I'd be happy to leave it. Skkaveola (talk) 15:49, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Toponyms that have existed previously may not exist now, and there is also no specification that the area you’re talking about is the area discussed in the source. If you can prove that the area you have in mind is the one being discussed, and that it was indeed under Stefan Dušan’s rule, fair enough; if not, then this information will continue to remain on the page since it is discussed alongside and with relevance to Tetova. Botushali (talk) 04:52, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That is true. I removed it pending further investigation into the sources which do show it is regarding Nanov Dol in Tetovo. The reason is that previously the text contained a very paraphrased version of the text itself and contained no such line in the citation at all. Secondary and tertiary sources often misrepresent the text, intentionally or accidentally so it is important that the primary sources are checked. The text does talk about the Nanov Dol in Tetovo*. Skkaveola (talk) 18:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Name in lead[edit]

Typical Albanian firstly I'd like to preface that what you've stated in this is in my opinion counter-productive and only encourages hostility. I've stated my position - the first name in the lead should be Тетово, as it's both the first official and WP:COMMONNAME of the town.

And even if the majority of the town speaks Albanian, the first official name comes first. See Pustec for example - despite the majority of the population of the village speaking Macedonian, the first name in the lead is the Albanian one.

Jingiby has also agreed on my position, as seen in his previous edit. Thanks. Kluche (talk) 21:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tetovo&oldid=1213268892"