Talk:Devoll District

Merging proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was no consensus. -- Salix (talk): 04:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

---

There is a merging proposal here: [[1]]Alexikoua (talk) 21:56, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't see why these should be merged. One is about an administrative district of modern Albania, named after the River Devoll; the other is about a medieval fortress in that area. No shared content between the two. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:32, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

They are the same place, only in different time. It would be nice to merge them together. Stupidus Maximus (talk) 17:14, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Not really. In many cases we do not do that. Classical Athens is different from modern Athens, Byzantium different from Istanbul, ancient Sparta different from Sparta (municipality), etc. In this case, where there is a clear break of historical continuity between the modern district and what was once the Bulgarian/Byzantine fortress of Devol/Deabolis, it should best be left as a separate article. Of course, the history can and should be mentioned, but they are distinct entities. Constantine ✍ 09:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I believe this discussion should be at Devol (Albania) rather than here, but now we have a start, so let's continue. Constantine, I moved the Zvezde fortress from Devol (Albania) to Devoll (Albania), but you reverted me. I kind of see your point, but you're missing mine. The problem is that neither Greek nor Bulgarian have the letter ll. Pay attention, in Albanian ll is only ONE letter, and that is a peculiarity of Albanian that few languages have (nominate one letter with two letter symbols). There are other such letters in Albanian btw. This should NOT be a merge, because the fortress is different from the district of Devoll as of today, so I will have to disagree with Maximus. However I think that in the future, although the sources may say Devol in both Greek and Bulgarian, they are referring to a castle in the region and river in Albania with the name of Devoll, so I suggest that the Zvezde fortress of Devol (Albania) becomes Devoll fortress. In Albania it's known under Devoll and the only problem that we have is that the fortress existed in 14th century, whereas the Albanian alphabet was decided in 1908. --_Sulmues ^{Let's talk} 15:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, the overriding rule for names in the English Wikipedia is to use the most common form for English-speakers, and the name is far more common in the relevant bibliography on the medieval period as Devol/Deabolis. If "ll" is a peculiarity of Albanian orthography, then that is IMO a reason not to move it, rather than vice versa... Anyhow, the whole situation is similar to how we use Dyrrhachium in ancient and medieval articles to refer to Durres, although it is one and the same place. In this case, Devol and Devoll look quite similar, hence I understand the temptation to use the second name, but... PS, is the 14th-century fortress the same as the 11th-century one? Since the location of the latter is AFAIK not clearly known, we should be very careful not to mix the two... 16:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

About the spelling of the other article: I created it at "Devol" because that seemed to be what the English literature was using. Most mentions of the medieval place are in the context of the Treaty of Devol, and that is always spelled like that. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Treaty of Deabolis [2], which is Devoll[3]. Stupidus Maximus (talk) 13:31, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, these are relevant links. As you can easily see from the search results, none of them uses "Devoll". Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Good idea. Is Devol, Devoll? [4]Stupidus Maximus (talk) 17:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

FPS, I'm affraid Stupidus has gotten a point here. Graboïs uses Devoll and so do the Albanian sources, let alone Jacque. I would agree that there are more sources in English with Devol, than Devoll, because the original sources are in Greek, and the English historians have mostly copied those ones, and then they have started to adopt to the Albanian ones. I think it's going to be confusing for the English reader to see Devol and then find out that the region is Devoll: he'll just think it's a typo. My thought process is that first we have to change to Devol Fortress to refer to both the historical fortress and relative diocese, and then we may think about the letter. For now Devol (Albania) is confusing as a name. What's wrong with renaming to Devol Fortress anyway? --_Sulmues ^{Let's talk} 19:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

About "Devol Fortress": the problem is that there was a second Devol in Macedonia, which was also a fortress. About the literature attestations: the Graboïs book you point out is the exception that proves the rule. Jacques isn't a reliable source about anything. The Albanian sources of course can be forgiven for preferring their native name forms, but it seems to be only a handful anyway, and insignificant in the face of the overwhelming preference of the remaining literature. Most of the literature does exactly what we are doing: call the place "Devol" and/or "Deabolis", and at the same time call the river by its modern Albanian name "Devoll", without any fear of confusion. So should we. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

You make sense. Thanks for the clarification. --_Sulmues ^{Let's talk} 19:58, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

This Devoll is the Devol/Deabolis of Macedonia [5], Greek sources say Korca is Macedonia too. Not N. Epiros. Stupidus Maximus (talk) 12:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

No, the Deabolis/Devol/Devolgrad of Macedonia is near Kavadarci, and the article is quoting a source that explicitly states it's a different place from ours. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

No the source is this. [6] Stupidus Maximus (talk) 18:10, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Entered a "page needed" in the article. The snipet doesn't show the Kavadarci Deabolis, so probably who has the book can see the entire page, where the other Deabolis in today's Macedonia might be shown. Showed page in the reference, although I don't see in the reference the name of Kavadarci. FPS, help, do you have the book? --_Sulmues ^{Let's talk} 19:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

A mirror of that article (on somebody's website) happens to be here – although I must admit I cannot at the moment find the place where I thought it said the other place was also actually called "Devol". Apparently the two shared the same Greek name, "Deabolis", but for the Macedonian place I can now only verify the alternate name "Devolgrad", not plain "Devol". Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

If you see the map, Devolgrad is near Bulgaria. Not Devoll. I think Treaty of Deabolis would be nice. Stupidus Maximus (talk) 09:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Devoll District. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724163134/http://www.instat.gov.al/graphics/doc/tabelat/Treguesit%20Sociale/Popullsia/POP%202009/t2.xls to http://www.instat.gov.al/graphics/doc/tabelat/Treguesit%20Sociale/Popullsia/POP%202009/t2.xls
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080608190852/http://geonames.nga.mil/ggmagaz/geonames4.asp to http://geonames.nga.mil/ggmagaz/geonames4.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 02:06, 12 December 2016 (UTC)