Talk:Korçë

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

President of activist group used as a source[edit]

Just want to remind everyone that sources written by activist leaders of irredentist organisations do not meet wp:RS [[1]].Alexikoua (talk) 09:22, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are talking about Ardit Bido and his book, he is the director of the National Archives, so it does meet WP:RS standards, Autoqefalia e Kishës Ortodokse të Shqipërisë në marrëdhëniet shqiptaro-greke, 1918-1937. Edion Petriti (talk) 09:57, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, great! If my memory doesn't fail me (I'd appreciate a confirmation by the older editors or admins), Ardit Bido was active in Wikipedia a long time ago, prior to 2011 (when I formally joined the Project) and he was banned. The reason for the ban was POV if I am not mistaken. Citing a banned editor's work and baptising it a "WP:RS" isn't the way to go. Find another source to back the information in question, not a banned editor. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ (talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 11:02, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure that Ardit Bido the editor was the same as our Ardit Bido we're talking about? Do you have any proof? Edion Petriti (talk) 11:41, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The work in question is Bido, Ardit (2020). The Albanian Orthodox Church: A Political History, 1878–1945. Routledge. ISBN 0429755465.. RS is determined by the quality of the work, which in this case is a 2020 publication by a high-quality publishing house, Routledge. Further personal remarks about a living scholar are under the scope of WP:BLP and I will ask immediately for them to be deleted.--Maleschreiber (talk) 12:30, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RFC[edit]

Should we use Ardit Bido as a source? Edion Petriti (talk) 11:49, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arbit Bido is/was the president of "Cham Albanian Youth" & "Club of Young Patriots" both irredentist organisations. He is involved in various minor incidents as an activist leader in these irredentist organisations [[2]][[3]]. These are far too low standarts to meet wp:RS.Alexikoua (talk) 12:06, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Edion Petriti: close the RfC. We're not going to discuss if the author of a 2020 publication by Routledge is RS because some editors are making personal remarks about him and linking far-right Greek Orthodox sites as "proof" whose frontpage features articles which explain to readers why Greece should follow Poland's path and ban abortions, Title: A Catholic country gives a cultural lesson to 'Orthodox' Greece --Maleschreiber (talk) 12:30, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Maleschreiber: I assume this means that nationalist advocatives by all sides can be used as RS? It's clear that the specific author is quite famous in Albanian tv for his irrendentist activity and he certainly does not meet RS. Another nationalist declaration: [[4]]. Ardit Bibo is widely involved in nationalist politics so not the best example of RS. Alexikoua (talk) 12:51, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should get an opinion from a user who is not involved in this debate. But for me, his doctoral thesis presents no problems, as part of published Academia. Otherwise we would not be able to cite Hitler's Mein Kampf because some user states that he was a national-socialist. If he has made irredentist claims, meaning some portion of an existing state should be allocated to another, links and sources should be given. Also, the above argument of him being a former user means nothing, does not stand. Edion Petriti (talk) 13:08, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Um, we should not be citing Hitler... in any case the appropriate venue is WP:RSN.--Calthinus (talk) 13:17, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
+1000 to Cal's comment ... for many reasons. The book was published by Routledge in 2020. RS judges the work and maybe the author based on criticism of their work. If you want to challenge it, the appropriate place to do so is RSN. Until then, the source will be returned and used. But this RfC and its comments can't continue - they're a BLP violation.--Maleschreiber (talk) 13:27, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The specific publication (Bido, Ardit (2020). The Albanian Orthodox Church: A Political History, 1878–1945. Routledge. ISBN 0429755465.) is reliable: Routledge Religion, Society and Government in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet States This Series seeks to publish high quality monographs and edited volumes on religion, society and government in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet states by focusing primarily on three main themes: the history of churches and religions (including but not exclusively Christianity, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism) in relation to governing structures, social groupings and political power; the impact of intellectual ideas on religious structures and values; and the role of religions and faith-based communities in fostering national identities from the nineteenth century until today. – Βατο (talk) 13:36, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A leader of the nationalist Party for Justice, Integration and Unity can't be wp:RS in this encyclopedia. This definitely needs admin oversight. @Bato: Nationalism is something we should be all against.Alexikoua (talk) 15:29, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Alexi yes, but I personally don't know the career of the author of the book, I noticed it was published by Routledge in a series of high quality monographs and edited volumes. The more appropriate evaluation of the specific source is WP:RSN. – Βατο (talk) 15:47, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The author of this work is a leader of the nationalist PDIU in Albania and that's not a private information. The publishing house alone isn't enough to justify works issued by representatives of such parties. Let us wait for the outcome of the rfc.Alexikoua (talk) 15:54, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I, as an editor who opposed and still opposes all nationalist ideas, and who -mind you- went too far as to receive even idimidating threats by nationalists both outside and inside Wikipedia (something which the AE committee can confirm), find it unfortunate that the editors are sinking deeper into WP:NATIONALIST in this topic area. Yet, the worst isn't this. Is that the editors failed to ever realize how low this is! Even the willingness to consider RfCs or the RSN instead of dropping it outright, speaks volumes. From me is a big NO to any of the above recommendations and ideas. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ (talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 16:10, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There can be no RfC that determines whether someone is a "nationalist" or not as means of examining WP:RS criteria. The next comment will go straight to BLP. You can't call the author of 2020 publication which is part of Routledge's series on religion a nationalist and use far right Greek Orthodox sites as "proof" in order to bypass WP:RS. It's a BLP attack. You can't call a living academic a "nationalist" without offering any proof that their work is actually nationalist and/or biased. In my book, if you don't want to use RSN, it means that you can't actually prove that the work is unreliable, so you're resorting to personal attacks against the author. I've seen it before when Sabrina P. Ramet was attacked without any shred of evidence. --Maleschreiber (talk) 19:54, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PDIU is a nationalist party. This is widely accepted in mainstream Albanian media too [[5]]. Saying that an author does not meet RS is not a BLP attack. We need to be sensitive on such issues.Alexikoua (talk) 21:00, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SCHOLARSHIP: Material such as an article, book, monograph, or research paper that has been vetted by the scholarly community is regarded as reliable, where the material has been published in reputable peer-reviewed sources or by well-regarded academic presses. Bido (2020) is part of a Routledge series which seeks to publish high quality monographs and edited volumes on religion, society and government in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet states. Routledge established that the author has achieved a level of academic maturity which makes him a reliable source for its publications, which are then distributed under various contracts in the libraries of humanities' departments around the world.
You are an anonymous editor on wikipedia and you can only judge reliability on the basis of the criteria which academic publishing houses establish. You cannot under any circumstances establish your own RS criteria and narrative (based on far right Greek websites) and you cannot use your personal criteria in order to characterize any living author. Other academics who publish under their real name in reliable journals can do so, not you. You can only accept WP:SCHOLARSHIP and use RSN for works, which you consider to be dubious. You can do that and if a community discussion supports your claims, then you can remove a source.--Maleschreiber (talk) 23:00, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's very disappointing for you to support the PDIU agenda that way. By the way WP:SCHOLARSHIP does not state that specific publishing houses can turn political activists into neutral authors. We need to use heavy precaution on this issue.Alexikoua (talk) 23:24, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I support the "agenda" of highly valued academic publishing houses against your personal narratives and a link from a far right Orthodox site. You can discuss your narrative with the community on WP:RSN. Until you do, I'll support the judgment of an academic publishing house which handles thousands of titles every year as opposed to the narrative of a far right blog. You do what you want to do with that information, but the debate is over because, frankly, you've got no argument in terms of WP:RS.--Maleschreiber (talk) 23:49, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you can support the claim that the specific author is not a leader of a nationalist party then there is no problem. This kind of political agenda is something all of us should be against. euronews.al isn't an far right Orthodox site.Alexikoua (talk) 00:21, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any problems. We should focus on the work itself, and not the author, he is probably RS. As for the claims made in his work, those should be under scrutiny. Edion Petriti (talk) 12:34, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No wonder the work recicles the PDIU nationalist narrative: Himara was always Albanian inhabited , victimizing Albanians, demonizing non-Albanians, etc.. By the way there is no rule that a publishing house turns political leaders of far right political parties into neutral academics.Alexikoua (talk) 12:44, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any sources/links to back that up? Edion Petriti (talk) 12:55, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As a source for what? This is a bad RfC, as it is not clear what is being asked. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As a source for political and ecclesiastical matters regarding the Orthodox Albanians and Church. Are publications like
  • The Albanian Orthodox Church: A Political History, 1878-1945, 2020
  • Kisha Ortodokse Shqiptare: një histori politike (1878-1937), 2016
reliable? Should we use them in our edits? Because users like Alexikoua and SilentResident oppose using them. Edion Petriti (talk) 18:49, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Emir of Wikipedia: is right. This is a malformed RfC. Wikipedia is not a democracy. Reliability is established by WP:RS not via RfC.--Maleschreiber (talk) 03:59, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Motion to close RfC. This was never a productive venture. --Calthinus (talk) 04:32, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No wonder the author above has already received negative reviews by reknowned academic journals (Friedrich Ebert Academic Foundation): as serving a specific point of view.Alexikoua (talk) 08:25, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Albanians remained in the province of Epirus, our brothers and language of a nation, are today's most pressing minorities across Europe.. PDIU asks today officially and directly, to the President, Prime Minister and Foreign Minister and any other state instance raise the issue of the remaining minority Cham Albanians to their Greek counterparts and the European Union.

"The demand of the Albanian side should be official recognition of the status of the Albanian national minority in Epirus. They are denied basic rights today: the right of self-proclaimed Albanian and education, communication involved when pushing native language. It is unconscionable if the Albanian state continues to be silenced, "said bido.
I have the feeling that this serves a certain pov.Alexikoua (talk) 09:14, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with @Calthinus: to close the RfC. The reliablility of a source should be discussed at WP:RSN. – Βατο (talk) 10:13, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is the specific author a leader of a nationalist party? If yes then there is no need for discussion.Alexikoua (talk) 10:31, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
there is no need for discussion is an anonymous users' personal thought not backed by reliable sources. The opinions of three scholars about the specific publication can be found here, and contrast with yours. It should be discussed at WP:RSN, not here. – Βατο (talk) 10:38, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A. Bido is a leader of the nationalist party PDIU. I can provide a mountain of sources for this fact. Moreover, since when opinions displayed in the book itself are considered a neutral selection of views?Alexikoua (talk) 11:05, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The absence of an international perspective from the majority of historiographic works produced in Greece and Albania after the year 2000 is also an approach entangled in past, ethnocentric perceptions and narratives. Hence, while Ardit Bido’s monograph (2016) is very well-informed in terms of Greek and Albanian bibliography, the author’s monoscopic perspective of the relations of the Ecumenical Patriarchate with the Orthodox Church of Albania falls short of understanding how developments analysed and discussed in his work were conditioned by wider political power reconfigurations that shaped the frame in which the Ecumenical Patriarchate could move.. To sup up: that's not RS.Alexikoua (talk) 11:25, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is not the same publication. You removed from this article a book published under the Routledge editorial board in the high quality series: Routledge Religion, Society and Government in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet States. You can discuss it at WP:RSN. Regards. – Βατο (talk) 12:41, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
According to Albanian media: [[6]] he attacked Anastasios of Albania. You really believe that a specific author is neutral? Authors directly involved in politics, especially in the field of far-right irrendetism can't be qualified as RS. There is a strict policy wp:WHATWIKIPEDIAISNOT.Alexikoua (talk) 12:55, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alexikoua, you shouldn't confuse bias with reliability (WP:BIASED). It is likely that Bido writes with an Albanian nationalist bias, but that doesn't mean that his book is unreliable for factual statements, just that it should be used alongside other sources. (t · c) buidhe 12:58, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Buidhe There is already plenty of non-neutral bibliography in Balkan politics. I can name several published PhDs that were not so well accepted in wikipedia but this reaches a new level: the author (per Albanian media) being involved in far-right activism as a nationalist party leader.Alexikoua (talk) 13:15, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with User:Buidhe. His statements should be discussed one for one, and not be taken down as a whole. Edion Petriti (talk) 14:09, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Anonymous editors can't decide whether a source is reliable or unreliable based on what they call "nationalist". Also, there's a BLP problem: @Alexikoua: you as an anonymous editor on wikipedia can't call any living author a nationalist without WP:EXTRAORDINARY backup from reliable sources. And you can't accuse someone of being a nationalist by providing as evidence the fact they seem to support Albanian language rights in Greece. That's not "nationalism", it's a basic human right which every community should enjoy throughout the world. I'll stop here - it's not wikipedia's function to be a WP:FORUM. Routledge's editorial board already decided that the work written by the author (@Edion Petriti: RS focuses first on the work and then the author if they have a long publishing history) is RS. They have the expertise to make that decision. Your contribution to that decision can only be made via the submission of a review article to a journal. --Maleschreiber (talk) 21:52, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PDIU is a nationalist, far-right political party:[[7]][[8]][[9]][[The Party for Justice, Integration and Unity (Albanian: Partia Drejtësi, Integrim dhe Unitet orPDIU) is a nationalist political party in Albania whose primary aim is the promotion of nationalissues. The party's goals and objectives are to express the struggle of the "Ethinic Albanians,]][[10]]: The Party for Justice, Integration and Unity (Albanian: Partia Drejtësi, Integrim dhe Unitet orPDIU) is a nationalist political party in Albania whose primary aim is the promotion of nationalissues. The party's goals and objectives are to express the struggle of the "Ethinic Albanians,. The author of this work is president of the party's youth and among the main activists.Alexikoua (talk)
  • We're not discussing PDIU, we're discussing a particular work published in 2020 by Routledge. I'm sure that the Routledge editorial board took into account everything which they considered relevant about the publication's reliability. --Maleschreiber (talk) 22:19, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A political party has leaders, one of them is the specific author.Alexikoua (talk) 22:34, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, achieved a Ph.D. in mathematics from the University of Michigan. That doesn't mean all the mathematicians are bombers. Please provide sources regarding Bido's career and statements. The adherence to a political party disliked in Greece doesn't make him automatically an unreliable source. I saw his doctoral thesis, it was well-researched and had a lot of sources, 4-5 on every page. So... that's about that. Edion Petriti (talk) 07:36, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Promoting works by nationalist leaders falls into: wp:WHATWIKIPEDIAISNOT.Alexikoua (talk) 12:42, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The term "nationalist" is not even mentioned into the wp:WHATWIKIPEDIAISNOT. Which paragraph are you referring to? Edion Petriti (talk) 13:38, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Advocacy, propaganda, or recruitment of any kind: commercial, political. Imagine that this is about far-right politics. By the way PDIU advocates for the "unification of Albanians into one state" [[11]]. Off course a leader of a political party can be mentioned as representing his political views.Alexikoua (talk) 11:34, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Some links on sources regarding his activities of advocacy, propaganda or political recruitment would do, thank you. Or nationalist statements, in Albanian or English. Edion Petriti (talk) 08:25, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Disagreement[edit]

@Khirurg, the line you have just readded and the corresponding source do not belong there. The source mentions nothing about the demographic reports of Korçë being affected by pro-Albanian bias and sympathies, it simply alludes to someone possibly passing pro-Albanian information onto the Commissioner in question, but the content of that information is not specified either. If you continue to add it, you will be violating WP:SYNTH. As per WP:SYNTH: This would be improper editorial synthesis of published material to imply a new conclusion, which is original research.

Nowhere in the quote that is currently present does Lambros Psomas say that based on biased pro-Albanian reports, Commissioner Sederholm noted in 1922 that Korçë's population was "entirely Albanian; the numbers of Greeks being insignificant". In fact, the quote makes no mention of Sederholm's report whatsoever, and the first half of the quote is entirely irrelevant. If there is another quote from the source which does indeed state that Sederholm's report on Korçë's demographics was influenced by misleading pro-Albanian information, then sure. Until then, it is WP:SYNTH. Botushali (talk) 03:51, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no SYNTH whatsoever. SYNTH occurs when combining two or more sources, but there is only one source here. The source makes it very clear that Sederholm was influence by a biased report, it really is that simple. Khirurg (talk) 03:54, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's really not that simple, Khirurg. You cannot dismiss the fact that the quote makes no direct reference to the demographic report in question. Just read the quote and point out where it talks about this specific report being biased. And yes, this is SYNTH as it is combining the source from Psomas, who talks about something unrelated for the most part, and the source from Austin, which describes the report, to imply that Commissioner Sederholm wrote a biased, pro-Albanian misleading report on Korçë's demographics, but that is simply not the case. Unless you have a quote that actually says what it is you are trying to add to the article, any further discussion is practically useless. Botushali (talk) 04:07, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the full quote from the source: Eyres was able to understand what was taking place in Korce¨. Because of Jacob’s presence, the ‘‘Manifesto,’’ the tension, and the uncertainty in the area, he followed the developments there directly and carefully. Yet, he misinformed his government by reporting that in the region of Gjirokaster the population had participated in the electoral process normally. 35 But the reality was that the Gjirokaste¨r region, together with the town of Himare¨, were strongly pro-Greek and the Orthodox Christians living there had abstained almost entirely from voting. Thus, the general picture that Eyres provided was misleading: the inhabitants of Gjirokaste¨r region, known for their allegiance to Greece, had indeed participated in the electoral process, which meant, for Eyres, that their supposed pro-Greek sympathies did not express the majority of the Orthodox Christians. In the pro-Albanian city of Korc¸e¨, a large part of the Christian population abstained from voting ‘‘owing to intrigues of Greek bishop and mayor,’’ as he cabled to the Earl of Kedleston. 36 The abstention from voting, therefore, occurred only in Korce¨ and only due to the intrigues of Jacob and Kota. Eyres, nonetheless, received a very revealing reply. Charles H. Tufton, FO secretary and head of the Central Department, asked Eyres to be more careful, as his informant on Gjirokaste¨r region, Morton Frederic Eden, was probably a victim of Albanian propaganda. The FO in London knew that Eyres’ information was misleading. It was also aware of the source of such misleading information: Morton Frederic Eden.
So it's not a case of SYNTH, but rather that the source not backing the claim being made. But look what else the source says: In contrast, the League of Nations commissioner in Albania, Dr. Sederholm, was a man who traveled almost to every part of the country and came into contact with the local population. Based on the information he gathered on the spot, possibly from election cataloges, he was able to point out that the Orthodox Christian inhabitants of Korc¸e¨ had almost entirely abstained from voting (about 97 percent). Sederholm also criticized the Albanian government for the way it had formed the electoral districts in an effort to eliminate Christian representation in the newly-formed Parliament, concluding that the Christians were ‘‘at the mercy of Mohammedan majorities.’’
So yes, it does not appear that Sederholm was misled about the demographics, but he was very critical of the Albanian government, and that can and should be added to the article. Khirurg (talk) 04:43, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If it’s relevant to the article of Korçë, sure. Botushali (talk) 05:11, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Supposed judicial error without any evidence (& decision never overturned)[edit]

Claims of judicial errors even by allied military courts need serious backing. The court took place in Thessaloniki and the sentence was never overturned. O. Pearson who claims about the court that "its members having been led astray by Greek informers who wished Gërmenji killed" doesn't mention that the decision was overturned either not even any kind of appeal or protest. By the way O. Pearson in this book declares himself (in his intro) as a pro-Zogist supporter and sympathiser [[12]]: as such wp:BLP accusations are not valid here: the reader needs to be aware of the quality of this information.

The same event is mentioned in Winnifrith (2002) (who is not a declared sympathizer of any specific ideology) he does mention this decision too but without saying anything about anonymous Greek informers who managed to influence the allied court because they wanted Germeni killed. This last clearly falls into WP:EXTRAORDINARY and claims of judicial errors by declared sympathisers claiming that anonymous informers managed to convince a court to impose the death penalty should be treated with heavy precaution.Alexikoua (talk) 02:55, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't read what the dispute is about, but it's best to avoid discussing specific sources in such terms. If there is a particular concern about Pearson (2005), it's best to look for sources which review his work and bring the issue to RSN to the extent that a debate about his work exists in bibliography.--Maleschreiber (talk) 21:10, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've read the available mainstream scholarship and there is evidence of Germenji was in close cooperation with the Bulgarian forces. Some quotes that are quite useful on the issue (by I. Blumi) Such an alliance permitted France to secure influence over events in much of Southern Albania for the rest of the war. More importantly, occupation helped control what was promising to be a messy confrontation between potential allies - Greece and Italy - over the spoils of southern Albania.[27] Pertinent here is the fact French authorities, as the Austrians would do in 1917, decided to empower local Albanians in order to help facilitate the peaceful administration of the territory. This overture to local stakeholders was initiated by a 10 November 1916 agreement that sought to stabilize what seemed to the French at the time to be a dangerously unstable situation. What made the region fragile were the activities of men like Essad Pasha from central Albania and locals with strong ties to the Bulgarian state, such as Themistokli Germenji (1871-1917).... His activities included organizing the armed resistance against Greek forces that eventually forced the occupying army to retreat. Germenji’s units also posed a threat to the French forces led by General Henri Descoins (1869-1928), whose task by occupying Korçë was to ensure that the region did not fall into the hands of the Bulgarians or Austrians... It was thus key for Bulgarian forces arriving in southern Kosovo and Macedonia to have Germenji work in tandem with a Bulgarian Muslim, Hasan Bastria (1887-1967) also known as Bastri Bey, to undermine French efforts. More than simply support guerilla units, Bastri Bey, who had been an Ottoman administrator and deputy based in Dibre a decade earlier, worked with Germenji on behalf of the Bulgarian quest to secure a calm and useful collaboration between local Albanians and its occupation regime based in neighboring Macedonia... It was during this “very delicate” situation that the French military administration signed protocol with local Albanians in order to hand over to them much of the day-to-day administration. Such a gesture seems to have been made to at least assuage Germenji and thus halt his military resistance.[31] Subduing Germenji’s resistance was so crucial because of his complicated relationship with other Albanians. As a major rival to Essad Pasha Toptani, the officially recognized “President” of Albania, Germenji proved a continuous headache for the French administration and the War Ministry.[32] Ultimately, the rivalry and the violence accompanying this struggle led the French to make the unpopular decision of executing Germenji after his capture in October 1917

There is also Elsie & Winnifrith etc that don't mention anything about this so-called judicial error or the supposed Greek informers that finally convinced the court to execute Germenji. As such the text needs to be rephrased per wp:RS. On the other hand Pearson declares himself a fervent supporter and personal friend of Zog (quite interesting Zog was also a Central Powers supporters as stated by I.Blumi) Alexikoua (talk) 23:01, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blumi and Pearson in what they say do not counter with each other. You have provided no credible reason why Pearson should be removed or even modified. Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:36, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The source you used talks about Bulgarians. Gërmenji was executed on accusations of being an Austrian spy, not Bulgarian. Botushali (talk) 00:54, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yet another academic paper that avoids this kind of wp:EXTRAORDINARY claim about a 'grave judicial error' without providing any evidence (Augris, 2000): Sous la pression de Venizélos notamment, la diplomatie reprend l’initiative et le statut de Korytza est mis en sommeil. L’armée reprend peu à peu le contrôle complet de l’administration et le protocole du 10 décembre 1916 est finalement aboli le 18 février 1918. Thémistocle Germenji, dont nous avons vu le rôle et les ambitions est envoyé à Salonique, jugé par un tribunal militaire et exécuté. La sévérité de cette décision semble indiquer que la France a choisi d’écouter ses alliés venizélistes, entrés en guerre au côté des Alliés le 12 juin 1917, et qui appréciaient peu l’homme fort de Korytza. Néanmoins, tout laisse penser que, sur place, les Français jouent leur propre jeu.. In general scholarship avoids to use weird claims without concrete evidence and the last sentence here describes the court's decision in a neutral way. Alexikoua (talk) 02:46, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A 'grave judicial error' as it turned the Albanians against the French entirely. It is not a weird claim, it was a very unpopular decision on behalf of the French as it resulted in the Albanians rising against them. Nonetheless, I am not sure if you are able to read and write in French, but the source above does not disprove what Pearson wrote; in fact, it also supports the idea that Gërmenji was executed to appease the Greeks. You keep providing sources, none of which qualify for Pearson's removal from this article.
Also, as a side note, Pearson being pro-Zogist does not discredit what he wrote on Gërmenji. Much of the patriotic Albanian nuclei, of which figures such as Gërmenji were part of, opposed Zog just as they opposed Essad Pasha. It makes no sense for Pearson to make things up about Gërmenji to somehow support Zog. These two figures (Zog and Essad Pasha) are widely regarded as traitors of the Albanian people. Botushali (talk) 03:59, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Augris (2000) supports Pearson's statement that Germenji was executed to appease the Greek side. Thanks Alexikoua for finding that source. Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:50, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes he provides a detailed and neutral explanation on the court's decision "seems to indicate" without over- exaggerating about so-called "grave judicial errors" without providing evidence on that.Alexikoua (talk) 05:41, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Botushali:: Is this part verbally taken from Pearson It later became clear that the military tribunal had made a grave judicial error, its members having been led astray by Greek informers who wished Gërmenji removed since he was a powerful Albanian leader.? I kindly asked for a quote (without success) but now after acquiring access on this book it is definitely taken word by word from Pearson.Alexikoua (talk) 05:54, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Alexikoua, you never asked for a quote on this TP, and if you did on your edit summaries, it must not have been clear enough. Nonetheless, you have failed to provide any evidence that refutes or denies the statements made by Pearson, so please refrain from altering his work in the future. Thanks. Botushali (talk) 00:54, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You fail to answer to the subject, but I assume that you need to familiarize yourself with wp:COPYVIO and COPYPASTE: In most cases, you may not copy text from other sources into Wikipedia. Doing so is a copyright violation. Always write the articles in your own words and cite the sources of the article.Alexikoua (talk) 04:46, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Korçë&oldid=1212082874"