Talk:Theodor Anton Ippen

Copyvio

Solved: Unjustified.

Much of the article has been copy/pasted directly from the sources so it has to be rewritten, not to mention that parts of quotes have been used in "very-out-of-context" way.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 15:33, 4 January 2013 (UTC) No, it is not. I will remove the tag you added. If you want to restore it please present the proof for your claim that "Much of the article has been copy/pasted directly from the sources".--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC) Instead of wasting efforts I went ahead and rewrote some of those parts. I also had to deal with your source misinterpretation i.e. In 1912 Ippen prepared ethnographic map of the Albanian-populated areas of Ottoman Empire which was submitted by the ambassador of Austria-Hungary during the London Conference as a basis for the border negotiations since no other delegation had such ethnographic map isn't supported by Noch unmittelbarer an der Albanienpolitik Österreich-Ungarns war Theodor Anton Ippen beteiligt, der es bis zum Ersten Weltkrieg zum titulierten Sektionschef im k.u.k. Ministerium des Äußern brachte. 1912 erstellte er eine ethnographische Karte der albanischen Gebiete der Türkei, die der nach London zur Botschafterkonferenz u.a. zur Regelung der Frage der albanischen Unabhängigkeit entsandten Delegation als Grundlage dienen sollte. Im Übrigen war keine der diplomatischen Vertretungen in London so gut und so genau über die nationalen Verhältnisse Albaniens informiert wie die österreichisch-ungarische. (I've left you a template message too).--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 17:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC) You failed to justify you copyvio accusations.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:56, 4 January 2013 (UTC) Based on this comment this issue is resolved. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Editing policy

I will revert your major changes per Wikipedia:Editing policy : Be cautious with major changes: consider discussing them first. With large proposed deletions or replacements, it may be best to suggest changes in a discussion, to prevent edit warring and disillusioning either other editors or yourself (if your hard work is rejected by others). Please be so kind, follow wikipedia policy and create the new draft in your own userspace if you insist on such major changes of the text.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:02, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

(unindent)There's no major change as all the removals are references management and unused parametres. That being said, it'd be prudent not to insist on adding your misinterpretation of the sources.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 18:12, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, there are major changes to the text of the article. Please follow stipulated wikipedia policy and refrain from further disruptive editing.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Changes due to your misinterpretation of the sources and you've also made 3 reverts.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 18:18, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

No I did not. I respect your concern for unused parameters in infobox and removed them myself. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:20, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Ethnicity

Solved:Ethnicity assertion removed from the opening since it is not relevant for subject's notability, per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies

@ZjarriRrethues: Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies "Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. " Please don't add ethnicity assertions in the lede of this article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:08, 4 January 2013 (UTC) I didn't emphasize any notion you might have on ethnicity, but mentioned the importance of his appointment to the press.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 18:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC) Yes, you did emphasize his ethnicity. The guideline I presented should be respected. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:23, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Sources II

He participated in writing and dissemination of the first history of Albania published onAlbanian language because he insisted that creating Albanian national consciousness would be beneficial for Dual Monarchy. is also not supported by the quote:

Ce sont aussi les fonctionnaires austro-hongrois qui furent à l'origine du premier livre sur l'histoire de l'Albanie en albanais“. Dès le mois de mai 1897, le consul Ippen insistait auprès du ministre des Affaires étrangères de la Double Monarchie sur les avantages que procurerait, pour l'éveil de la conscience nationale albanaise et donc pour l' action autrichienne en Albanie, l'écriture et la diffusion d'une histoire de l'Albanie.

, which doesn't say that he participated in any writing or that he insisted in creating a national consciousness. However, it was reflected in the twice removed sentences I replaced it with.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 19:17, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for finally presenting some arguments for your position. I think you are wrong. Please find below machine translation of the quote. It says that he wrote history of Albania and also what he insisted on.

These are also the Austro-Hungarian officials who were at the origin of the first book on the history of Albania in Albanian. "From May 1897, the consul Ippen insisted to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Dual Monarchy of the benefits that would accrue to the awakening of national consciousness Albanian and therefore the Austrian action in Albania, writing and distribution of a history of Albania.

Is it wrong translation?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

It very much is, but even if it wasn't, nobody would possibly consider that you could use that quote to support what you wrote i.e. read my phrasing, which you reverted, make any minor modification you want to make and add it. Then we'll continue with your primary label of Ippen as a "travel writer".--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 22:34, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

• The translation I presented directly supports the use of the words you disputed (participated in any writing and insisted in creating a national consciousness). If the translation wasn't wrong I don't think there is an issue here.
• Travel writer is not a label. Here is source which says " Теодор Ипен12, аустро- угарски путописац и дипломатски чиновник" [Theodore Ippen, Austro-Hungarian travel writer and diplomat] Путописац means travel writer The source explains that Ippen traveled trough Sandžak of Novi Pazar in 1890 and wrote his work "Novibazar und Kossovo (das alte Rascien). Eine studie ..." based on this travel.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

The translation was wrong and it doesn't say that wrote anything or the insisted on "creating" any national consciousness. One Serbo-Croatian source mention doesn't make it a primary label. Elsie's primary labels are scholar and diplomat. and makes frequent reference to his authority on Albanological subjects as others sources (Blumi mentions that he was regarded as a "top Albanologist") i.e. we won't label him "travel writer" in any way, to diminish his highly regarded work as there aren't enough sources making such a distinction, not to mention that in English "travel writer" has a negative meaning in such subjects, which isn't the case as Ippen was a highly influential scholar of his era.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 22:59, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

• Your only complaint is one word related to creation of the national consciousness? How would you translate Ippen's intentions with national consciousness?
• The first sentence presented his occupations based on their chronology. Not to label him or to diminish his work. I didn't know that in English "travel writer" has a negative meaning, but I don't insist on it.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:07, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

@ZjarriRrethues: Kind reminder to answer above question.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Sources III

• Quote:

  Ippen paid a visit to the Catholic mountaineers on the Turkish-Monenegrin border — Kastrat, Hot, Grude, Klement, and Shkrel. He learned about their grievances against the Turkish government and Montenegro's efforts to make use of them. He suggested to his government that immediate help was needed to improve their situation. From 1898 to 1903 Austria distributed corn to the mountaineers, thus winning them to her side.

• Article:Based on Ippen's suggestions, which were result of his visit to the region of Malësia in August 1896, Austria-Hungary distributed corn to its population between 1897 and 1903 to gain their support

• The source says that he visited the region, reported their issues, asked for assistance, which was given and as a result of that they became more pro-Austrian. Simply put, without attribution of motives that aren't in the source.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 23:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

You misinterpreted the source to present actions of Austria-Hungary as humanitarian which is not what source and the context of the events say. Please revert yourself and gain consensus for your edits first based on the editing policy, as explained on this talkpage.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:36, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

They're presented as the source presents them, without labels of any kind, so please stick to WP:RS and WP:OR.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 23:58, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

No. They are not. Austria-Hungary had other motives in Albania than humanitarian. There is absolute scientific consensus about it. Please revert yourself.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Of course I don't deny that AH's general policy of Albania was favorable because it seeked its own "Balkan ally" (as the UK and Russia had done in the course of the century), but this event isn't described as part of that general policy by the source. If the source doesn't label Ippen's activities, I won't label them either. Enough said.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 00:11, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

The source doesn't label Ippen's actions as humanitarian aid. Ippen was Austria-Hungarian consul not humanitarian worker. Please revert yourself.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

(unindent) There's not even hinting of labeling as regards the wording "Ippen had extensively visited the Catholic clans on the Ottoman-Montenegrin border and reported their problems caused by the Ottoman and Montenegrin authorities. To improve their conditions he asked for provisions of assistance, which were granted as from 1898 to 1903 corn was regularly distributed to the clans, which in turn became pro-Austrian". --— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 00:31, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Antidiskriminator, why do you think that should be reverted? bobrayner (talk) 03:15, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

@Bobrayner: I clearly explained my position. This is not the first time you are joining discussions on multiple pages or topics I edit or multiple debates where I contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit my work. Someone could see your edits as wikihounding and tag team. Please clarify why are you following my edits? --Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

He's perfectly allowed to comment on anything in terms of working for its improvement. That being said, should I take your refusal to further comment on any of 3 mentioned source misrepresentations as WP:SILENCE (if you do continue though, I'll ask for the wordings to be compared by others).--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 19:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

There is no refusal to comment. Just your refusal to hear different arguments and to respect wikipedia policies and unjustified reports. I repeated several times. Respect wikipedia editing policy Be cautious with major changes: consider discussing them first. With large proposed deletions or replacements, it may be best to suggest changes in a discussion, to prevent edit warring and disillusioning either other editors or yourself (if your hard work is rejected by others). --Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

(unindent)Please stick to the sources, because WP:IDHT isn't prudent. Btw since now there are at least two users questioning your issues please reply to at least one.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 22:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I think I gave a fairly clear reason for my position about "humanitarian activities" of Ippen and I don't really have much to add to that now. You are of course free to disagree, but I don't think you should expect everybody to be now somehow obliged to keep discussing this with you for as long as you are dissatisfied with it.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Birthplace

The article says Ippen was born in Sezemice "in Bohemia", and links to Sezemice (Mladá Boleslav District). However there are two places called Sezemice in Bohemia. The town of Sezemice in Pardubice District, and the village of Sezemice (Mladá Boleslav District) in Mladá Boleslav District. A clarification which one is correct would be much needed. Can someone please find something in German-language sources? - Darwinek (talk) 19:47, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

There seems to be substantial evidence that the Ippen family has origins from the Sezemice of the "Pardubice" district. https://books.google.hr/books?id=YOrr4HFiTGEC&printsec=frontcover&hl=hr#v=onepage&q=ippen&f=false pp 486. And https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Ippen,_most%C3%A1rna_a_stroj%C3%ADrna Kkupus (talk) 20:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)