Talk:Allies of World War II/Archive 8

The text below related to the section Albania has a mistake.

"Albanian forces fighting on the Axis side were, among others and irregulars, the 21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg (1st Albanian) and Skanderbeg (military unit). The last one fought under Italian command in the Uprising in Montenegro, the first one was fighting under German command in Yugoslavia.[59]"

The unit "21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg (1st Albanian)" was not created in the Republic of Albania, but in Yugoslavia. Eventhough, the Kosovo province was populated by Albanians it was not part of the Republic of Albania. Please either remove it, or move it to section "Yugoslavia" as Yugoslavian collaboration with the Axis. This unit had no relation with the state of Albania and its government.

The correct description would be:

"A unit of the 14-th Italian Army Corps named Skanderbeg (military unit) was composed of Albanian individuals and participated in the Uprising in Montenegro."

LupinoJacky (talk) 21:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

This is irrelevant for an article about Allies. Groups, divisions, collaborationist associated or directly fighting for the Axis were found present in almost every Ally country be them organized, govt, irregular or not. Let me bring to the attention :The Vichy Regime in France (turned into a puppet regime similar to the one in Albania), The Russian Liberation Army, The Greek NAZI group,The Serbian Volunteer Corps, or even a multiethnic Foreign Volunteer Divisions.etc. Anybody whom added that last paragraph about Albania ( which is neither relevant nor correct) is either totally unknowledgeable about WWII or there is some subjectivity against this particular country. The article should be about Allies and their efforts, not about random groups which collaborated with the AXIS in these countries. 217.24.254.66 (talk) 00:11, 6 February 2015 (UTC)QTeuta

Dear Editors,

Please let me kindly invite you to investigate and clarify the status of Albania as an Allied force. Since there is an editor below who unilaterally refuse even considering the provided facts and historical sources, then I invite a quorum of other editors (preferable with knowledge on WW2 history and Balkans) to investigate the case. Best Regards LupinoJacky (talk) 14:44, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Albania was an Ally state, the book "Enciclopedia of World War II, Volume 1, Section "Treaties Ending the War", Page 824, ISBN-10: 0816060223, ISBN-13: 978-0816060221" acknowledges that Albania signed the peace treaties in the end of WW2 as an Allied country.

Citing page 824: "The first peace treaty concluded between the Allies and a former Axis nation was with Italy. It was signed in Paris on February, 10, 1947, by representatives from Albania, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Czechoslovakia, Ethipia, France, Great Britain, Greece, India, Iraq, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zeeland, Pakistan, Poland, Slovak Republic, South Africa, the Soviet Union, the United States, Yugoslavia, and Italy." (weblink)

Unless there is any source showing the contrary, please add Albania to this page, clarifying 1) the fighting contribution of the Albanian National Liberation Front and 2) the fighting contribution of the government in exile by King Zog in terms of 2.1. resisting the Italian invasion, 2.2. resisting throughout WW2 through the Legality Movement forces. End of the Game. LupinoJacky (talk) 17:39, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear @LupinoJacky: Wikipedia is all about facts and sources . My point being : that if the sources show Albania as an ally then Albania was an ally , plain and simple . You do not have to get into endless discussions with biased editors such as the editor with the username @The Banner: . Unless he can bring at least one source clearly stating the Albania was an Axis nation , then your request is more than legitimate . You have a source showing Albania clearly as an Allied Force , then be bold and do make your revert . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 09:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear Gjirokastra15, I did that but he reverted the page to the original structure and closed it for edits. So I cannot technically edit it.LupinoJacky (talk) 09:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I will contribute further into this matter later today . I will try to collect the necessary sources for a matter as such , and in the meantime hopefully other editors will give their opinions as well . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 10:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Albania is listed twice, among the minor affiliated state combatants and as a Soviet client state. The country was occupied by Italy before the beginning of WWII (in April 1939). I think each country should be listed only once. As far I know, the communist uprising started in 1941, and the country was not liberated by the Soviets. In 1944 communists took power after the withdraw of Germans. At the same time, Albania was a client state of Italy from 1939 to 1943. The country participated in invasion of Greece and partition of Yugoslavia 1941. Albania declared war on the United States in 1941. So, what would be the status of Albania? N Jordan (talk) 02:20, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Dear NJordan, Albania did not participate in the invasion of Greece or partition of Yugoslavia, it can not even hypothetically be true. Albania was invaded by the Axis (Italy) and after an armed resistance against the Italians, the Albanian government was defeated and its government moved to exile (during the war the monarchy Government of King Zog was located in London, UK), please see^[1]. This was the only official and internationally recognized government of Albania during the war, its army was dissolved upon invasion. During exile the government engaged in combat against the Axis through the Legality Movement armed formations.

On the other hand, the Italians created a kuisling puppet administrative entity/government with a pro-Axis agenda. However it did not posses an army and therefore could not even theoretically take part in any armed fight against other parties. The armed troops located in Albania were Italians (1939-1943) and Germans (1943-1944). There is no historical source to back up even a single battle where the 'unofficial' Republic of Albania 1939-1944 (with its non-existing army) took part in war against Allies.

On the contrary, as you can read below (please forgive me, but I better not repeat text and sources here) there was a massive partisan movement against the Axis through the Albanian Liberation Front (LANC), which fought a guerrilla style of war against the local Axis forces. So both 1) the official government in exile and 2) the massive popular resistance LANC fought against the axis. Allegations involving Albania as an Axis force are not backed up by any historic source and are a scandalous hoax. I would kindly invite you to read below for references and facts: LupinoJacky (talk) 10:56, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

The following books written by non-albanians historians acknowledge the existence of an Albanian National Liberation army fighting against the Axis occupation forces in Albania:

• Fischer, Bernd Jürgen. Albania at war, 1939-1945. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 1999. Hibbert, Reginald. Albania's national liberation struggle: the bitter victory. Pinter Pub Ltd, 1991.
• Albania in the Twentieth Century, A History: Volume II: Albania in Occupation and War, 1939-45, Owen Pearson, 2006, ISBN-13: 978-1845110147 ISBN-10: 1845110145; http://www.amazon.com/Albania-Twentieth-Century-History-Occupation/dp/1845110145
• War in the Balkans: An Encyclopedic History from the Fall of the Ottoman Empire to the Breakup of Yugoslavia, Richard C. Hall, 2014, ISBN-10: 1610690303, ISBN-13: 978-1610690300 (see Section: Albania in World War 2)

In addition, the following online sources (independent, non-albanian):

• http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/al_antif.html
• http://countrystudies.us/albania/151.htm
• http://motherearthtravel.com/albania/history-9.htm
• http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/albania_resistance.htm

The historical perspective of Albanian's involvement to WW2 is as follows (summarizing):

• April 1939, Italy invades Albania. The king of Albania and its government do a mild resistance against the Italians but are defeated. - 1939. Italians invade most Albanian cities and create a puppet administration government (not elected or approved by Albanians) - 1941-1945. Albanians gather against the occupation driven by communist politicians. They create a National Liberation Front army that comprised at its peak of 70.000 soldiers. They resided in the mountains and rural regions because the main cities were occupied by the Axis forces. - 1943 - Italy capitulates and the territories it held were taken over by German forces. - 1941-1945 - The National Liberation Front fought extensively against the Axis forces, and according to the sources ca 28.000 soldiers and 30.000 total Albanian people die in the fight against Italy and Germany.

• The government of Albania at the time of WW2 was the monarchy of King Zog, which went on exile in UK after the invasion by Italy in 1939. Upon invasion, as in many other countries (France, Greece, Yugoslavia, Slovakia) the Axis forces (Italy and Germany) created a puppet government in the capital of Albania during occupation. This puppet government did not have any army so did not engage in battle against Allies, however it played a propaganda role. The resistance represented a significant support of the population and peaked with an army of ca. 70K soldiers at its peak (see sources above).

I would request that in the quality of admins you correctly acknowledge the fighting resistance of the Albanian National Liberation Army against the Axis forces, in accordance with the historical sources mentioned in this post. All the links above demonstrate the existence of an armed struggle against Italian and German occupation from a communist-led Albanian resistance. Can Albania be please added to the list of Minor Combatant Nations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.90.207.212 (talk • contribs)

And as I tried to tell you before: that struggle was done by a popular movement, not by the government. The Banner talk 15:16, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

In section Greece, a non-governmental resistance movement is mentioned: "From 1942, a strong Resistance movement appeared, chiefly in the mountainous interior, where it established a "Free Greece" by mid-1943".

In section Yugoslavia, a non-governmental resistance movement is mentioned: "A part of the country was occupied, with the anti-Axis resistance movement split in Serbia between the royalist Chetniks and the communist Yugoslav Partisans of Josip Broz Tito who fought both against each other during the war and against the occupying forces. Independent State of Croatia was declared on Croatian "ethnic and historical territory" what is today Republic of Croatia (without Istria), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Syrmia and Bay of Kotor. The Yugoslav Partisans managed to put up considerable resistance to the Axis occupation, forming various liberated territories during the war."

Given the above sources indicate a considerable armed struggle by Albanian partisans and given that not all the other nations mentioned here fought through their de-facto governments (see examples above), therefore Albania should receive the same acknowledgement as Greece and Yugoslavia.

Furthermore, the Italy declared war on the Albanian state in 1939 and the Albanian government fought a mild resistance against the Italians. The article Italian Invasion of Albania is a very well documented article (please see the references within https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_invasion_of_Albania ). Even during the war the Albanian government in exile supported an armed struggle against the Axis through its local troops called the Legality Movement army, (please see the references within https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_Movement)

Therefore, given that the "official" Albanian government fought against the Axis forces till their defeat, but also its organized troops fought during the war, then Albania should receive the same treatment as Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Czechoslovakia and Luxemburg.

The argument that there was a de-facto government/adiministration set by the Axis and that becomes the participating factor in war has two fatal flaws. 1) Albania had only one official government in exile that was internationally recognized and the new government was not elected, therefore there is no state continuity in legal terms. 2) By symmetry, France should be listed an Axis force because of the Vichy government, Greece should be listed as an Axis force because of the Hellenic Government, etc for all puppet pro-Axis states ...

Given that there are numerous sources backing up both 1) an Albanian governmental armed struggle against the Axis during invasion and exile (as Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Czechoslovakia) and 2) a popular resistance fight against the Axis in forms of a resistance (as Greece, Yugoslavia), then under the principle of fair historical treatment I request an immediate acknowledgement of the status of Albania in this article as a Minor Combatant Nation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LupinoJacky (talk • contribs) 19:20, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

There is another undeniable proofs of the engagement of Albania with the Allies. After the war Albania signed the Peace Treaty as an Ally country and received war reparations. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peace_Treaties,_1947 and all the references therein United States Department of State

Foreign relations of the United States, 1946. Paris Peace Conference : proceedings, Volume III, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1946, online: http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=header&id=FRUS.FRUS1946v03&isize=M). The Axis countries recognized by the allies in the Peace Treaty are Germany, Italy, Hungary, Bulgaria, Finland, Austria and Japan. The proceeding of the meeting by the USA Department of Foreign relations, so clearly an independent source regarding Albania.

Albania signed the post WW2 Peace Treaty as an Allied force and received 5M dollars of war reparation. That is the uttermost proof that the Allies recognized Albania as an Allied country and paid reparations for the damage created due to its military involvement against the Axis. In the treaty reparations mean Axis payed to Allies.

Therefore, since there is no reasonable doubt on the sources-backed engagement of Albania with the Allies. In such circumstances, please immediately add Albania to the list of Minor Combatant Nations.--- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.90.207.120 (talk) 20:34, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

No, there is indeed no reasonable doubt that you are creative with the truth and that Albania joined the Italian war effort, as you can see here: Uprising in Montenegro. The article Paris Peace Treaties, 1947 does not give evidence that they have signed the peace treaty, only got a few dollar in reparations. Interesting enough, Albania was not even invited for the first meetings, not a sign that it was a valued ally. ([1]) The Banner talk 22:12, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Not a valued ally does not mean that is not an Ally or not ? In fact you just indirectly admitted that Albania was an Ally , it just was not a valued one .... simple concepts here Gjirokastra15 (talk) 17:07, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear TheBanner, the thesis that Albania joined the Italian war effort is 100% false, please read the source you are giving. What you probably confuse is the term Albanian and the Republic of Albania, there are Albanians living in Montenegro, Kosovo, Greece, Albania. The article you mentioned never indicates that the Albanian GOVERNMENT provided ANY form of assistance to the uprising. The article says "some Albanian irregular forces", no mentioning of any form of help by the Government of the Republic of Albania. As such, the thesis that Albania helped the Italian war is completely wrong as there is absolutely no evidence to support it, even the Wiki page you showed denies that fact.

Second, please read carefully the peace treaty protocol, Albania WAS part of the Peace Treaty as an ally force. We can have no discussion over some undeniable fact, just please read it and get convinced by yourself.

By the way, war reparations are a VERY STRONG sign that Albanian contribution against the Axis is significant. Countries like Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, etc ... did not get ANY war reparations, because they did not do a real resistance to the Axis despite very minor combat incidents. Only countries that really fought against the Axis and had big losses in human lives and property like Soviet Union, France, Greece, Yugoslavia, Albania, ... received war reparations.

Numerous historical sources given above clearly show 1) that the Albanian government fought the Axis, 2) that the Albanian resistance forces fought the Axis, 3) there is no source showing the contrary that Albania fought against the Allies.

Please some other Editor intervene as facts and historical sources here are abundant and undeniable. LupinoJacky (talk) 09:03, 4 February 2015 (UTC) |}

Please not that IPs and account are most likely similar. With this person clearly incapable of understanding the meaning of Uprising in Montenegro and Skanderbeg (military unit), where it is clear that Albanian forces fought as part of the Italian army, I consider it soapboxing and being creative with the truth and facts. The Banner talk 14:06, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear TheBanner, please do not vandalize the discussion. Your links have no connection to the Albanian government. You are mentioning some Albanian individuals and groups which have no connection to the Albanian government as a side on the war. Skanderbeg was a unit of the Italian army as the source says "assigned to the 14th Italian Army Corp". There is no reference that shows any link between those troops and either the official Albanian government in exile nor the unofficial kuisling Albanian Government. Please do not remove the discussion unilaterally, instead I invite you to provide any historic source to support your claim. If not, please someone stop the vandalism of TheBanner LupinoJacky (talk) 14:31, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear The Banner, you are seriously compromising your impartiality related to this topic. The signing of the Peace Treaty and also the War Reparations that Albanian govt received after WWII are clear evidences, ( despite not being the only ones) that the Republic of Albania was considered an Ally. Greece and Yugoslavia had their fare share of NAZI collaborators groups as well, ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Volunteer_Corps_(World_War_II) and http://www.worldmediarights.com/index.php?hidAction=episode&eid=526) but nevertheless weren't declared part of the AXIS. Since they massively fought against the invaders and the collaborators were punished after the war. The same is applicable for Albania as well. QTeuta (talk) 10:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)QTueta 16:36, 4 February 2015

No, I am not losing my impartiality. I am loud an clear is stating that this whole discussion is nonsense and fully POV. You can register as many accounts as you want, but that still does not change the facts that they sided with Italy for most of the time. At best, teh partisans were regarded an ally but certainly not the government. The Banner talk 20:32, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

It is obvious that you are not a historian, or have any professional knowledge on scientific methodology. Firstly, I am not the same person as Lupino, as it is easy verifiable from the IP. Secondly, as it is stated in Encyclopedia that Lupino provided, Albania was an Ally. Thirdly, I don't understand what is the point that you are still discussing the dynamics of resistance, where you clearly don't know what are you talking about mixing, Albanian govt, Partizans, Unorganized Movements, Random Groups, Collaborationist and more all together.Lastly, I agree with Lupino this topic should be reviewed from other impartial, professional editors which want to focus on facts. Farewell. QTeuta (talk) 21:31, 4 February 2015

ThBanner (comment above) is the Editor who is creating the mess. He has absolutely no historical reference to support any of his claims and refuses to consider the numerous references provided above. Please someone do something to stop him and analyze the case objectively. LupinoJacky (talk) 20:57, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

When I started this discussion, I just wanted to clarify the situation, not to start editing war or anything similar. I didn't edit the article itself and have no plans to do that. We can't rewrite the history with our editing wars. The only thing we can do is to hurt Wikipedia as a project.

The situation with Albania is specific. Kingdom of Albania was invaded by Italy in April 1939, five months before the beginning of WW2. After a very brief campaign, Italians established a protectorate called Albanian Kingdom. The army of that protectorate participated in initial attack against Greece (allied country). After the occupation of Yugoslavia in 1941, parts of Yugoslavia (another allied country) were annexed by that protectorate. After the capitulation of Italy, Germans entered Albania and reorganize Albanian kingdom as a puppet state. So, that Albanian Kingdom was clearly part of the Axis.

However, Albanian people organized several resistance movements, the major one was National Liberation Movement under the influence of communists. At the end of the war, they established new government under Enver Hoxha and transformed Albania into a communist country. That new Albania was clearly antifascist country, but also a Soviet client state.

The problem is that invasion of Albania in 1939. was not a part of WW2. Albanian king left the country, but he was never recognized by allies as legal representative of the country.

Personally, I would leave Albania among the allies, as a Soviet client state. But the text should better explain what really happened in Albania.--N Jordan (talk) 05:28, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear NJordan, you have provided opinions without any historic reference. Albania was not a soviet client state, neither was the new puppet government recognized allies. I will prove below that you are wrong in both claims.

Please refer to the book "Owen Pearson, 2006, Albania in the Twentieth Century: Albania in Occupation and War, From Fascism to Communism 1940-1945, IB Tauris, New York, ISBN 1-84511-014-5", which explicitly states that "No State has accorded de jure recognition of the Fascist occupation of Albania.". So your claims are not true.

Albania became a communist country AFTER the war, not during it. The communist government came to power after the Albanian elections of 2 December 1945 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_parliamentary_election,_1945 ) It became a pro-Soviet ally after the communists took power and had NO close partnership of any type to the Soviets before. You are entirely confusing the period of discourse, please note that WW2 happened between September 1939- September 1945.

The topic here is simple and we should avoid deviating the focus. The page is about mentioning those countries that were Allied and Associated powers and contributed militarily against the axis. We have numerous independent and serious historic sources to back up Albania as such and also we have agreement among Wiki users here on the existence of an armed contribution of both the Albanian communists and its official government. What are we waiting for? LupinoJacky (talk) 09:29, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

The question is WP:BURDEN & WP:WEIGHT. The Italian invasion of Albania occurred prior to the the time frame of World War II. The puppet government established by Italy, [[Albanian Kingdom (1939–43)] (and later a German puppet government), was an part of the Axis, just as the Second Philippine Republic was. Now following the Italian invasion of Albania, King Zog went into exile, but I have not found any reliable sources to show that there was a government in exile to join the Allies (as is was the case with the Commonwealth of the Philippines (and thus why the Philippines is listed under both Axis and Allies)). Now there was an anti-fascist Albanian resistance during World War II, but that isn't a government, nor where they fighting on behalf of a government in exile. Now there is a post-World War II [state], but that falls outside of the scope of the article World War II, whose scope ends on 2 September 2015. Therefore I am of the opinion (surely to be attacked) that Albania being listed under the Axis as a puppet state appears to follow what reliable source(s) verify.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:59, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Apparently there should be additional information in this page about Philipines, since there is only little to no information of what you said. Meanwhile, King Zog of Albania while in exile gainsay the Italian Invasion by means of [Legality Movement]. More info you could refer to this source. The war dynamics of each states during WWII are complicated and need an IR specialist ( one whom knows terms as: invasion,puppet government, recognized government, etc), which clearly none is. Furthermore are not relevant for this article. Being an Ally is not decided upon " opinions" but historical facts, as the signing of the Peace Treaty ( Enciclopedia of World War II, Volume 1, Section "Treaties Ending the War", Page 824, ISBN-10: 0816060223, ISBN-13: 978-0816060221) as well, as War Reparations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by QTeuta (talk • contribs) 12:40, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Puppet states created under invasion are not legitimate representatives of a country, neither were them recognized by the international community nor were they elected by the people of those nations. The only official government was the Kingdom of Albania was an internationally recognized state, since no recognition of the puppet state occurred (see source above). Do you have any reference stating that Allies recognized the puppet government as the official representative of Albania? Since Albania contributed militarily during WW2 and was with the Allies side in the Peace Treaties ending the war, then, in my opinion, this discussion is redundant and without a point. Please read the sources above on the involvement of both the official Government of Albania in exile (see sources above) and the National Liberation Front (see sources above) against the Axis forces.

And I believe the historic treatment here is negatively biased against Albania. Many other countries had puppet governments: France (Vichy State), Greece (Hellenic State), Czechoslovakia (2 states Slovak Republic, Republic of Moravia and Bohemia), Norway (Norwegian National State), Yugoslavia (State of Croatia). With the same logic you are imposing, all the above states should not have been considered as Allied states. But they were Allied countries because the official governments and the people of those nations contributed militarily and in the end those countries were officially members of the Peace Treaties ending WW2 as Allied and Associated Nations. LupinoJacky (talk) 09:56, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear RightCowLeftCoast, please see the proof that USA, as the biggest Ally, did not recognize the puppet government in 1939 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_United_States_diplomatic_relations_by_country).

Please let me state that this page is about mentioning which countries were and helped Allies, and their contributions against Axis. As the sources indicate Albania was an Ally, contributed to WW2 as an ally and was on the Allies side of the table in the treaties ending the war. Further discussions about puppet governments, individuals or groups sympathetic to Axis should not be omitted (we don't rewrite history), however every argument should be placed in the respective Wiki page, not in this one. LupinoJacky (talk) 10:26, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

• Albania was occupied by fascist Italy in 1939, and remained a satellite or puppet state of the Axis until the Germans withdrew in 1944. There were Albanian communist partisans who fought against their fellow Albanians in the Balli Kombëtar, but Albania as a nation state did not gain freedom of action from Axis control until the Germans withdrew in October 1944. It then became a communist state under Hoxha, but there were no Germans on its territory to fight by that stage. While Hoxha's partisans fought against the Balli Kombëtar, they did little if any fighting against the Germans. Not sure they would be stacked on the Allies side of the ledger. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 12:28, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear Peacemaker67, your claim that the "partisans did little if anything" against the Germans is simply WRONG. Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_resistance_during_World_War_II. The partisan troops reached up to 70,000 regular (partisans) and irregular (territorial troops) in November 1944. The casualties and losses of war were around (including civilians) 30,000 killed, 12,600 wounded and 44,500 imprisoned or deported.^[2] 70.000 soldiers for a country of ca 1.000.000 people means ca 7% of the population was militarily engaged against the Axis. As a comparison USA (the biggest ally) had 11,260,000 soldiers (World_War_II_casualties#Military_casualties_by_branch_of_service) out of a population of 132,164,569 (1940_United_States_Census). That means USA engaged 8.5% of its population as armed forces, while Albania 7%. The war casualties of USA were 0.34 % of population, the war casualties of Albania were 2.81% of population (World_War_II_casualties]). How can you claims those live were not relevant? Who are you to judge the relevancy of the lives of people who died fighting against Axis?

And on the discussion on Albania: It was officially an Ally state, as the Peace Treaty agreements ending the WW2 show (see references above).

Wiki is about sources and facts. Please let us not spam this talk page with opinions, you can put those statements in your Facebook page or on a blog. Either someone backs up his opinion with facts, or there is no need to express political opinions in this page. It is the third time a person writes something using plain words, without any reference to any historic source. LupinoJacky (talk) 13:11, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

• We could only remove Albania as an Axis-allied state if we consider that there was no Albania at that time, but just a Italian puppet state. But I hardly think that is the point of the proponent of this discussion. Then we should also ignore the Albanian activities against Allied troops, which would be enormously unfair. FkpCascais (talk) 23:53, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear FkpCascais, Do you have a doubt that after the Italian invasion Albania was a puppet-state? Please see references above in this thread on the matter. LupinoJacky (talk) 02:10, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Well, it is true that Albania was a nation subjugated by the Axis, but that does not ipso facto make it a member of the Allies of World War II. In order for that to happen, there would have to have been active resistance against the occupation or Albanian volunteer units fighting alongside the Allies, and at least some form of government or leadership that could speak for the nation/country and pledge itself to the Allies. The second never existed, and the first comprised was mostly local resistance groups, and these practically only post-1943, when the war was already decided, and fighting more for post-war power locally than for overthrowing the occupation regime (pretty much as happened in Greece and Yugoslavia at the same time). I don't think anyone, even an Albanian, would dispute that until 1943, there is preciously little evidence of any activity that might include Albania as a people, let alone as a state (in so far as an Albanian state still existed legally) among the Allies. Quite the contrary, the only Albanian units that fought outside Albania did so on the side of the Axis. For better or worse, Albania was incorporated into Italy in 1939 and up until ca. 1943 was an integral (and rather quiescent) part of the Italian "empire", with Albanian units participating in the invasion of Greece, occupation duties in Montenegro and Kosovo, etc. The fact that Albania was present at the peace treaty of 1947 is really no proof of anything. As one of the states liberated from Italian rule, of course it had a role to play there. That does not retroactively make it part of an alliance in which it played no role at all. Constantine ✍ 00:06, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately, I could not see any historic source in your response text. Nevertheless I would like to provide you with facts and references on the raised claims. There was a well-documented resistance against Axis by Albanians, please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_resistance_during_World_War_II and the above mentioned historic references. Your argument that the contribution is not relevant because "the war was already decided in 1943" is POV, since i) the war ended in 1945 and ii) several other Allied forces contributed after 1943 (see e.g. Brazil,etc...). The other claim that the war happened as a "local fight rather than overthrowing the occupation regime" is also an opinion. However, your main argument that there was no evidence that there was a resistance against the Axis is clearly falsifiable through the sources above on the resistance of the Albanian National Liberation Front (a.k.a. communist partisans). In order to bullet-proof my claim, please see the historic source stating that the Italian and German casualties as a result of the armed resistance in Albania were 26,595 killed, 21,245 wounded and 20,800 prisoners ^[3]. Those casualties are proofs of the existence of a significant armed resistance given the sizes of the armies involved (see reference on sizes of armies above). The treaty ending WW2 was signed by the Allied and Associated States and being officially there means, by simple rule of induction, that it was officially an Ally. LupinoJacky (talk) 01:50, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Are you seriously mentioning our Wikipedia article Albanian resistance during World War II as proof of something? Cause more than 3/4 of the article are unsourced. FkpCascais (talk) 02:13, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

The existence of an armed resistance of Albanians against Axis is backed up by numerous sources and beyond any doubt. In addition to the sources of the Wiki page, the following books written by independent foreign authors can help boosting that fact:

1) Fischer, Bernd Jürgen. Albania at war, 1939-1945. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, ---

2) Albania's national liberation struggle: the bitter victory. Reginald Hibbert. Pinter Publishers, 1991

3) Albania in the Twentieth Century, A History: Volume II: Albania in Occupation and War, 1939-45, Owen Pearson, 2006, ISBN-13: 978-1845110147 ISBN-10: 1845110145; http://www.amazon.com/Albania-Twentieth-Century-History-Occupation/dp/1845110145 --

4) War in the Balkans: An Encyclopedic History from the Fall of the Ottoman Empire to the Breakup of Yugoslavia, Richard C. Hall, 2014, ISBN-10: 1610690303, ISBN-13: 978-1610690300 (see Section: Albania in World War 2)

The ultimate proof, as I said, are the 26595 Italian and German soldiers that died fighting against the Albanian resistance ^[4]. LupinoJacky (talk) 02:31, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Well, even the Albanian resistance during World War II makes zero references to any acts of active resistance prior to the 1943, quite unlike the situation in say, Yugoslavia or Greece. And while there certainly was a resistance movement after that, let's not kid ourselves as to why it appeared and grew at precisely this time. The same happened to a degree in Yugoslavia and Greece as well, for the same reasons: everyone saw the writing on the wall and a) gained confidence to oppose the Axis and b) began to prepare for the post-war power struggle. That much is so well known that asking for sources for it is like asking for sources that Germany began World War II seeking Lebensraum.... And Brazil is another false analogy, because Brazil did not fight alongside the Axis before 1943, and then a) entered the war formally as a state and b) fought actively with troops alongside the Allies in Italy. As for the claimed German casualties, there are two problems a) Wilson's work is essentially a collection of wartime cables and news snippets, which have not been studied or verified by archival research by a professional historian and b) figures claimed by resistance movements are always exaggerated (if one believed Greek resistance sources, half the German army died in Greece ;)). Anyhow this bears no relation: the Albanians fought against the Axis from ca. 1943, no-one disputes this, but the Allies were a political alliance of countries, not just anyone who fought against the Axis. For instance, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army also fought against the Germans as well as alongside them, should it be listed under the Allies too? The problem is that in Albania, like the other occupied countries, there were groups fighting both for and against the Germans, but unlike the other countries, there was no official organ claiming to represent all of Albania that publicly put the country on the Allied side; in so far as there was an organ claiming to represent an Albanian government, until 1943 it was under Italian control and until 1944 under German, after that the Germans withdrew from the country and the National Liberation Movement took power. It is true that the problem with Albania being formally as a member of the Allies is the fact that most people ignored it (as can be seen succinctly here), but still... Another example, the Greek resistance forces, even though they did not obey the official government in exile, were formally recognized as being under the jurisdiction of the Allied GHQ in the Middle East, and hence Allied combatants. Did something analogous exist for Albania also? If so, then this could be a far more serious argument in favour of inclusion. Constantine ✍ 09:24, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Allow me just a remark Constantine, in Yugoslavia the resistance was very strong in 1941. And second thing, I am not so sure how much Albanian troops were active in Greece, but in Yugoslavia they were completely engaged in fighting both Partisans and Chetniks, so not only the country was part of the Axis, but effectively fought for them. Regards, FkpCascais (talk) 14:14, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Indeed in Yugoslavia the resistance began almost from day one, my point was that after ca. 1943 it was not just about national resistance, but about the post-war order of things, and the conflicts of the period 1943-44 in almost all Balkan states were two-sided: one by the guerrillas against the Germans and their puppets, and one among the guerrillas themselves. As for the Albanians fighting for the Axis, in 1940 the Italian invasion force comprised a few Albanian battalions. They fought poorly and many even defected. As no parts of Greece were annexed into Albania, that was that for us. But indeed, the Albanian puppet regime played an active role further north. I think it is clear that in so far as an Albanian official government existed, it was on the side of the Axis. My point, which LupinoJacky persistently ignores, is that to be a member of an alliance you need to be recognized as such, not merely to fight against the same enemy. So for instance, if there was a degree of official recognition on behalf of the Allies for the resistance, then at least there could be the basis to claim the existence of an "Free Albania" within the Allies even without an international representation. Otherwise the Albanian resistance were simply co-belligerents or even independent agents. In no case of course can the case be made that Albania as a whole was solely and always part of the Allies, and had nothing to do with the Axis as all, as LupinoJacky suggests. Constantine ✍ 14:33, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

My friend Constantine, what is obvious for you might not be the true version of history. Therefore, in my opinion, references are needed for every claim, especially for a historic topic. To the best of my knowledge, scientific research work as follows: If I provide you a source claiming a fact on casualties, then to counter-oppose it you need to provide me another primary source (look up definition of primary source) that indicates different figures on casualties. Historic sources cannot be opposed with verbal arguments. I believe you and came into agreement to the main topic of the discussion, citing extracts from your text "... while there certainly was a resistance movement ..." and "... with Albania being formally as a member of the Allies ...". In addition, one more argument to Constantine: The Albanians had also a government in exile after the Italian invasion, the official monarchy government of King Zog I (note: till invasion it was internationally recognized and part of League of Nations) which resided in London was officially represented through the Royal Albanian Legation. The official government in exile fiercely opposed the occupation and declared siding with the Allies. Please see page 8 ^[5]</ref>, also see that King Zog I clearly repudiated the actions of the puppet government^[6]. Furthermore, the government in exile also contributed militarily to the war through the Legality Movement. In our case, we have a general agreement among users (including Constantine) on the existence of an armed resistance by Albania against Axis and also sources that the country was officially an Ally in the end of the war, which concludes an agreement on the criterion of inclusion (see definition of Allied states on top of article).

Since Albania is now added to the list of Allies together with multiple historic sources backing up the fact, there is no purpose to further discuss internal country politics in this page. Such discussions should be held in the talk sections of the correct page Albanian resistance during World War II. I would be happy to further discuss there. LupinoJacky (talk) 12:04, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Except that all of this was done by you against the common opinion of pretty much every one else in this discussion. Declaring consensus achieved when that is not the case is not the way the world works. All sources state that Zog spent his exile in comfortable retirement, with no real activity towards claiming his throne or trying to mobilize opposition against Italian rule, and with the British and US governments steadfastly refusing to recognize a government under him. So who led the supposed government in exile? What declarations did it make? Did it sign the Atlantic Charter? Did it raise volunteer troops? No. From what I can tell from Owen's work, there were several attempts to form such a government and have Albania officially enter the Alliance, but none bore fruit. Even the Legality Movement that you linked to was a domestic political grouping with no evidence, at least in the article, of any actual resistance. Constantine ✍ 14:14, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Constantine is right. Unfortunately I will be able to contribute more on this later tonight, but just by googling Axis Allies Albania at Google books one can see that:

• King Zog surrendered and exiled and admitted Axis rule. There was little or none resistance activity at the beginning. Many Albanians living in the territories that were annexed to Albania, welcomed the Axis forces. The formation of Greater Albania satisfied most Albanians.
• The resistance started happening quite late, and it was much influenced by Yugoslav partisans.
• Albania only got recognized in the Paris Peace Conference by the insistence of the Yugoslav delegation, more precisely Moša Pijade, who wanted the Albanian communist party to be recognized as representative of Albania. The Greek delegation of Constantine Tsaldaris opposed Albania participating at all. So Albanian participation in the conference was more of a political game.

I didn't went trough all articles, but I remember quite well sources citing Albanian units fighting actively in Yugoslavia. Also, Constantine, I said that about 1943 just in order so LupinoJack cannot compare and say "So if resistance started being more active in Greece and Yugoslavia in 1943, then so did in Albania", the cases are impossible to compare at all. Regards, FkpCascais (talk) 15:05, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Since there is an official document that 1) Albania signed the peace treaty ending WW2 as an Ally and 2) there are numerous evidences proving an armed struggle against Axis, then the condition for inclusion is clear based on the definition of an Allied force (as clarified in the start of this article). Since you both accept both those facts, the additional arguments are rhetorics that does not violate the inclusion criterion. Those additional arguments not related to the scope of this article should be correctly places under the respective pages. 15:37, 7 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LupinoJacky (talk • contribs)

You are stating things without providing facts or sources. As it is previously stated 1. King Zog had organized resistance thought The Legality Movement, 2. It is not important who pushed forward the presence of the Albanian delegation at the Paris Peace Conference, neither the historical dynamics, since at the end Albania signed as an Ally.

Enciclopedia of World War II, Volume 1, Section "Treaties Ending the War", Page 824, ISBN-10: 0816060223, ISBN-13: 978-0816060221" acknowledges that Albania signed the peace treaties in the end of WW2 as an Allied country.

Citing page 824: "The first peace treaty concluded between the Allies and a former Axis nation was with Italy. It was signed in Paris on February, 10, 1947, by representatives from Albania, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Czechoslovakia, Ethipia, France, Great Britain, Greece, India, Iraq, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zeeland, Pakistan, Poland, Slovak Republic, South Africa, the Soviet Union, the United States, Yugoslavia, and Italy." (weblink)

3. The WAR Reparation were not given neither to collaborator neither to an Axis member or a puppet govt so I see no point, unless you have a specific agenda on discussing this topic further. QTeuta (talk) 15:54, 7 February 2015 (UTC)QTeuta

http://images.library.wisc.edu/FRUS/EFacs/1946v04/reference/frus.frus1946v04.i0011.pdf has been included in this article as a cite that Albania was an allied power for the purposes of the treaty. The content on page 802 is a proposed amendment by Albanian representatives that Albania be included as an "Associated power" under article 26, But the proposed text for article 23 refers to "all the Allied or Associated Powers" which suggests not an allied power as defined in the treaty draft. GraemeLeggett (talk) 17:27, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

I am starting a new section , given the lack of paragraphs in the above discussions making it very hard to communicate especially considering the length of some of the posts .

The matter in hand is very simple : There are sources showing Albania as an Allied Nation , showing Albania as being occupied and invaded by both Italy and Germany ( depending on the time frame ) , with exact numbers of casualties and loses and an armed resistance . Finally we have the original proposed amendment to the treaty text which puts Albania as an Associated power as well . Making the case of Albania a well sourced one . Any person(s) opposing this outcome , have to bring some sources proving otherwise , or said more simply showing clearly Albania as an Axis power . Let us not complicate a matter that in fact is very simple to solve . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 17:33, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

This is part of a text I want to insert. Is it OK?

"Albania, although initially not invited as a full participant as its role in the anti-Fascist war was not being recognized as a contribution in the Axis defeat, was included in 1946 at the Paris conference as part of the Allies on the insistence of the Yugoslav delegate Moša Pijade. Yugoslav intervention secured Albania a mention in the peace treaty with Italy.^{[7] [8] [9]}

I don't want to be considered as opposing Albanian efforts of the resistance. But, if including, we need to address properly what and how happened. It obviously can be worded better. But this source from Paulin Kola explains well the situation of Albania at the Paris Conference. FkpCascais (talk) 18:59, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

This is interesting, but not relevant to an article about Allies specifically. It seems to me like to much details. Maybe you should add the Yugoslav efforts to help out the Albanian Delegation at the respective page of the Peace Conference. QTeuta (talk) 19:22, 7 February 2015 (UTC)QTeuta

Dear FkpCascais, I agree with you that we should address the case properly and your latest edit (not the text above) in my opinion was supported by sources and correct. I changed minor wordings as "included"->"recognized" (international relations use this term) and also removed exclamatory words such as "heavily", and "as they were retreating", since there were battles also before retreating, please see the German winter operation against partisans 1943-1944. And another minor edit the date they took control was 29 November 1944, not 29 November 1945. I like your input and think the article is balanced now, mentioning all aspects -resistance against Axis, -collaborating units with Axis, -recognition and war casualties. Do you agree to leave this issue as is and not enter a endless edit war? LupinoJacky (talk) 19:16, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

I am more than fine with it although it needs rephrasing a bit , i think a more appropriate version (as per sources ) would be this . ' "Albania, although initially not invited as a full participant as its role in the anti-Fascist war was not being recognized as a contribution in the Axis defeat, was included as part of the Allies in 1946 at the Paris conference -in part- because of the insistence of the Yugoslav delegate Moša Pijade. Yugoslav intervention appears to have secured Albania a mention in the peace treaty with Italy.'

So i am more than fine with it just please do include these minor corrections as well . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 19:18, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Albania has already a more than enough long paragraph in a page about WWII Allies. The efforts of the Yugoslavs should be explained separately in the respective page. The signing of the Peace Treaty had is own dynamics due to the specific political situations at the time, spheres of influences and territorial claims on a small divided nation of Albanians. Including much details in this specific country is not in accordance with the spaces given to every other country during the WWII, so I would oppose putting these details in this page, but rather propose to be added on the respective topic of Peace Treaty.QTeuta (talk) 19:32, 7 February 2015 (UTC) QTeuta

I am not OK with the text here, but with the text of the article right now, after the latest edit of FkpCascais (current Article version). The text given here is not correct in the section "as its role in the anti-Fascist war was not being recognized as a contribution in the Axis defeat" is POV. The correct and balanced contribution is "Albania was recognized as an Associated Power in the Peace Treaty with Italy in 1946.". People who lobbied for Albania, such as Mr. Mosa Pijade are a detail that does not change the fact that it was an associated Power. Do you agree with this revised formulation for the first sentence? For the other edit of FkpCascais on the communist partisans, I fully agree with him, subject to the minor edits on the wording as currently in the article. And I also like the input of QTeuta that the lobby of the Yugoslavian delegation in the Peace Treaty is definitely very important, but off-topic and should be mentioned in the Peace Treaty article. Since there were lobbying on the interests of most countries during the treaty and we cannot edit the text of most countries inside this article. The other part that this was after communists took power is not relevant, since all other Allies as well signed the treaty after the war. So any opinions against the cold formulation: "Albania was recognized as an Associated Power in the Peace Treaty with Italy that ended the Second World War on July-October 1946." LupinoJacky (talk) 19:35, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

I do not intend to edit-war, and do not intend to deny Albanian resistance efforts. I do understand that Albanian resistance ended up in a shadow during WWII, although I also understand the reasons why that happened (Axis offered Greater Albania while Allies offer was the return to 1913 borders, and because many Albanians ended up engaged in military actions against Yugoslav Allied forces). What I opposed is putting Albania as Allied without explanation and just selecting the positive aspects of it. I wouldn't oppose if that was what happened, but the entire situation is way more complex. From what I see, Albania was not intended to be part of the conference, but it was Yugoslavia who insisted in including them. Yugoslavia obviously also did that with the intention of making the new Albanian communist authorities their allies. If it wasn't for Yugoslavia, the Albanian resistance efforts would probably ended up unfairly unrecognized. However, when talking about Albania in this entire period of WWII, we need to balance it with the fact that for most Albania was an Axis allied. The resistance progressively gained its momentum, it collaborated closely with Yugoslav communists, and at the end they took the power and became Allies. However, unfortunately, I am not so sure how much of it is really recognized, seems that beside Yugoslavia the rest of allies were against inclusion of Albania, and I am not sure how much the inclusion of Albania in the Paris Conference actually means recognition of Albanian communist government as Allied. For time being I don't mind the current state of the article, but I do have these doubts. Regards. FkpCascais (talk) 20:03, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

To echo FkpCascais' doubts, the whole argument seems to rely on Albania's inclusion in the 1947 treaty. This is not a firm piece of evidence, as this was a post-war political decision, and no proof of anything regarding the wartime period. What worries me most in this whole campaign is not that an effort is made to recognize the role of Albania's resistance movement—all too often overlooked—but to eradicate its Axis role as well, as one can witness in the parallel edits and discussion at Talk:Axis powers. I cannot but question the motivations of LupinoJacky in this regard, because while there is an argument to be made of including the Albanian resistance among the Allied camp, stating that it was never part of the Axis and removing any reference to that in the relevant article is plainly wrong. Constantine ✍ 20:32, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Stating opinions without providing necessary sources is wrong. Nevertheless, stating that during occupation Albania was an Axis power seems not in line with the situation described in here about neighboring countries of Greece or even Yugoslavia. Nothing is mention in this article about the NAZI led quisling govt in Greece which were also strong anti-semits as well( which was not the case of Albania). The same goes also for the Indipendent State of Croatia ( part of Yugoslavia) which was a pro-Nazi entity, which went Axis at 41. As to my knowledge there is no document that an Albanian recognized govt( means not under occupation,puppet govt, groups, or unrecognized) has signed as an Axis. Anyways far as I am concerned to discuss the dynamics of the time could take ages. This is an article about Allies, the Collaborations and Peace Treaty in another.QTeuta (talk) 21:00, 7 February 2015 (UTC) QTeuta

But the Independent State of Croatia obviously is listed in the Axis. FkpCascais (talk) 21:09, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Should Yugoslavia be listed on the Axis as well than? Anyways in case of ISCroatia it is vaguely explained in here that it was an Axis power, and furthermore there is little reference of 30 pro-Axis groups created in Yugoslavia. While in the Albanian section we have given 2 sentences to 1 short lived pro-Nazi division of Scanderbeg. Which was without no trustable source ( i.e translated and not in a foreign language) duplicated as it existed in Montenegro for a small uprising. My point being the paragraph of Albania is not in accordance with the spaces given for the neighboring country in this article. On a first look it almost seems like in Greece,for example, there was no pro-NAZI, Axis govt at all, while the other countries have even less info. QTeuta (talk) 21:13, 7 February 2015 (UTC)QTeuta

I agree with QTeuta, the treatment to all countries should be equally fair. If there is a group of pro-Axis fighting Albanian individuals mentioned, then pro-Axis fighting groups should be mentioned in all other related countries such as Greece, Yugoslavia, France, etc ... In that aspect, the current treatment to Albania is discriminatory and not in line with the other countries. LupinoJacky (talk) 21:35, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear Constantine, I can assure you that my aim is not to deviate any historic truth, as I am a firm believer of historic sources. This discussion you are raising belongs to the Axis page, it should continue there not here, otherwise mixing those two articles creates a mess. However to respect you I am replying here: The Albanian page on the Axis forces was removed by me only one main reason: The definition of Axis is Countries that Fought against Allies. In the Albanian section on Axis page there were zero references showing any battle between any army of Albania against any army of Allies. In that optics, the definition of Axis state (see Axis page for definition) is not supported by any source. Unreferenced assertions should be removed as a rule of thumb from every historic page, do you agree in that point? If there is any historic evidence to indicate a military involvement of Albania (not random unaffiliated groups) against Allies, then please be my guest and add that source to the Axis page. I would be more than happy to assist you there. LupinoJacky (talk) 21:16, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

There are 3 section about Albania at this time, so I'll answer here. Albania is specific because of 4 things. (1) It was occupied before the beginning of WW2. (2) King was not recognized by Allies during the war. (3) Albanian guerrilla forces fought independently - not as a part of coalition (no military or diplomatic missions during the war). (4) Albania is not one of original members of the United Nations (all Allies countries signed the UN Charter in 1945) Previously, Albania was listed as Soviet client state. It's ok to remove it from that section since it was not liberated by Soviets. (However, I don't believe that commies won democratic elections and established dictatorship!) The current text about Albania is much better than a previous one. I believe it's still work in progress and it would be improved. Somebody compared Albanian puppet state in WW2 with the Independent State of Croatia. There is nothing wrong to have Croatia listed as part of both coalitions (Allies and Axis), because Federal Republic of Croatia (as a part of Yugoslavia) fought against Axis. N Jordan (talk) 03:47, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Did Albania declared war on any Axis country? All the other countries mentioned actually declared war to Axis countries, and Albania not only didn't declared war, but actually fought and invaded countries that were Allied. On the point of the Paris Conference, Albania only got to participate thanks to the insistence of Yugoslavia, and that happened only because Yugoslavia was interested in legitimizing the new communist government. Also, please stop mixing up Croatia into it. The Independent State of Croatia was an Axis state created within Yugoslavia. The Federal Republic of Croatia was just one unit of the new socialist Yugoslavia. So IS Croatia is obviously listed at the Axis states because they were Axis and fought along Axis. Yugoslavia is obviously listed with the Allies because it was an Allied country that fought a war against Axis states and their allies. FR Croatia is obviously not mentioned in any list cause it was just an unit within Yugoslavia. FkpCascais (talk) 01:58, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Read definition at the top of this article "Allies were the countries that opposed the Axis powers", your argument is not a criterion for exclusion by the definition of this article and not relevant to the other discussions of the thread above. The rest is POV without historic references and not worth of further considerations. LupinoJacky (talk) 11:55, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Please find at least one source stating clearly that Albania was an Allied country. FkpCascais (talk) 14:33, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

He has found plenty . The article is well sourced . Why don't you instead bring a single source stating that Albania was NOT an allied country ( or an Axis power ) ? You said you would do so , and you found nothing . wp:idontlikeit is not a valid reason . Wikipedia is all about sources , and you have provided only wp:POV . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 16:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

So no direct source? Just a source citing rebel groups and a post-war inclusion as observer in a Paris Conference... You spoke about reporting me to ANI. Go ahead. Beware of WP:BOOMERANG. That would be great to finish with this historical revisionism you guys started and finishing this POV pushing nonsense. FkpCascais (talk) 17:48, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Vandalization, hatery? It is not my fault Albania was Axis and not Allied, so stop victimizing yourself and revisioning history. I added what the source explicitelly says, revert yourself as you removed sourced material. And no, it is not acceptable for you to change fundamental words of the text and make it sound more appropriate to what you want. FkpCascais (talk) 18:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Please read the article and the talk pages for numerous supportive sources. I refuse to enter into your game of personal insults, aimed at distracting the focus from the historic truth. No more comments on that. LupinoJacky (talk) 23:40, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

@The Banner::@FkpCascais: , it has been explicitly explained above that in order to contest the outcome , all it needs is just one source saying that Albania belonged to the Axis camp . Just one source is all it needs , yet you have brought 0 , nada , zero , null , NOTHING . In fact the only source that FkpCascais brought was one that in fact points to Albania belonging to the Allies camp . For that reason , if this war edit continues based on wp:idontlikeit , you will be reported . Wikipedia is not your personal playground where you can write , deny , or alter the historical facts , nor a medium for your nationalistic wp:pov . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 18:39, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, mate, but your own sources disqualify Albania as an Ally. You have stated earlier:

but when you read a little but further you can read this:

This quote makes loud and clear that an "Associated Power" was not the same as an "Allied Power" but that there was a difference between then. As Albania was an "Associated Power" it was not officially an ally.

Sorry, I read the treaty and the term "Allied and Associated Powers" is always used on-block. I couldn't find any section of the treaty that has a seggregation on which countries are Allies and which others are Associated Powers. If you think those concepts are different, then please read the post below and please provide two different lists 1) Allies and 2) Associated Powers. If such a differentiation exists then the whole structure of nations in this article should be reclassified by this division. Otherwise, if such a differentiation doesn't exist then we accept the terms as interchangeable synonyms . LupinoJacky (talk) 00:33, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

So, make my day and go to WP:AN/I. The Banner talk 19:21, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I've tweaked the text to reflect that discrepancy. I'd like also to point out that the treaty quoted is also the one with Italy, not with the other Axis powers. GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

@The Banner: You are forgiven 'mate' , however your lack of historical knowledge is pretty obvious . In fact here for your convenience DO READ what an associated power is : When the three United States entered the War , the three Allies were always referred to as the Allied and The associated powers BECAUSE Woodrow Wilson declined to sign a formal agreement , he 'associated' with it . Thus this source proves that an associated power = Ally , thus Albania=Ally . You see that's why i have made an appeal since the first instant for SOURCES , which you have provided none . Instead you preferred to alter totally the meaning of a source proving the exact opposite of what you claim it to be ( for more do see wp:synth ). With all due respect this is becoming ridiculous . This is my n-th request , and i claim it is a legitimate one : The fact that Albania is an Ally power has been established with a myriad/multitude of sources , thus unless someone does bring a source showing otherwise , THEN the Albanian flag merits to be in the infobox . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 20:27, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

That statement of "Associated Powers" refers to the First World War - hence Woodrow Wilson (d 1924) not Roosevelt nor Truman. GraemeLeggett (talk) 20:54, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

True indeed , said otherwise i made a fool of myself lol . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 20:59, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Hehe, its OK no worries :) The other day TheBanner even confused Yugoslavia and Albania, he did not know that Albanians in Kosovo are not part of the Republic of Albania. So it is normal that some references will be rejected and some other not. But definitely it is better to bring ANY reference than to bring ANY word. LupinoJacky (talk) 21:02, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree with the edit of GraemeLeggett that indicates that the treaty is with Italy and that the status is Associated Power, because that is a correct TECHNICAL reading of the treaty. However, there are two problems with that insert 1) Concerning WW2 in Europe, the treaty with Italy was the first treaty to be signed by a broad scope of nations defined as "Allies and Associated powers", since the Potsdam Agreement of 1945 ending the war with Germany was signed only by USA, UK and Soviets. The last Treaty of San Francisco with Japan included 48 nations, many neutral states during the war e.g. Turkey, etc ..., and did not include countries that opposed Axis (Yugoslavia and Albania did not join that treaty). So the treaty with Italy is the most representative in terms of nations opposing Axis (reflecting the definition of Ally in the top of this article). 2) The other point to be discussed is: If we partition the term "Allies and Associated Powers", then naturally we should state "Which countries are Allies?" and "Which countries are Associated Powers"?. If we want to create that separation in the article, we should then systematically edit the text of states falling into those categories (We cannot leave that label only for one state). Please GraemeLegget, as the initiator of this classification, can you provide the list of Allies and Associated Powers? LupinoJacky (talk) 20:46, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

The demand for some sources is sensible. So, re the participation of Albanian units in the invasion against Greece, the "War in the Balkans: An Encyclopedic History from the Fall of the Ottoman Empire to the Breakup of Yugoslavia" states "The invading Italian army contained some Albanian formations". The same brief article has a nice overview of the situation in Albania during the war. In the "Historical Dictionary of Albania" by Robert Elsie, perhaps the main modern English-speaking Albania scholar, we find the following: in "Relations with Greece" (p. 175) "on 28 August 1985, the state of war that still officially existed between the two countries was finally declared over", while in the "World War II" section (p. 486) "When Italy joined the Axis war effort with Germany on 10 June 1940, Albania, too, found itself at war, ... Italian troops, including 50,000 Albanian soldiers, invaded Greece on 28 October 1940" (admittedly there must be an error of some kind here, possibly an extra zero). Pearson's collection of original documents in pp. 54ff. contains several references to Albanian fascist militia battalions fighting alongside the Italians: "these divisions were reinforced with three Albanian battalions" (p. 54), "some Albanians were to fight against the Greeks, many deserted. Two battalions of Albanian recruits sent by force to the front refused to fight; large-scale desertions from these units compelled the Italians to withdraw them from the front" (p. 55), "The Albanian Tomor battalion assaulted and captured a hill in the region of Lapsista, but in the face of a Greek counter-attack it fled in disorder along the valley" (p. 57), etc. As has been stated elsewhere in this discussion, the Albanians were neither very enthusiastic nor very effective, but they were there. Bernd Fischer in his "Albania at War, 1939-1945", p. 78, writes: "Albanian armed forces played only a minor role in support of the Italians. Mussolini claimed that two Albanian battalions were attached to each Italian division that invaded Greece. While this is certainly an exaggeration, at least two battalions of Albanian fascist militia, the "Tomori" and the "Taraboshi," saw action against the Greeks in the Korça area". Now, as to whether Albania was a member of the Allies here's a weighty opinion, by George Marshall in 1947: "Albania had neither been in a state of war with Germany nor declared war on her, and that Albania did not participate in the Paris Peace Conference as an Allied or associated Power; [...] and Albanian forces had participated in military operations against Greece". Of course the Soviets and the Yugoslavs held a different view, and the French notably also suggested that Albania be counted among the Allies; but it shows that many of the people who actually fought the war did not consider Albania to have been an Ally. A nuanced view can and should be taken in our presentation of Albania's role in the war, since the facts that Axis-aligned Albania was a country under occupation and of Albanian resistance to the Fascist regime cannot and should not be airbrushed away, but the situation is by far not as clear-cut as some Albanian users would have it. Constantine ✍ 21:24, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Constantine, thank you for your well-formed input. My response to your claims:

Claim 1 - "Albania was not in war with an Axis state". Response: Not true (1.1) and not relevant (1.2), Response 1.1: Albania was invaded by Italy 1939-1943 and Germany 1943-1944, and according to an the definition of Invasion "An invasion can be the cause of a war, be a part of a larger strategy to end a war, or it can constitute an entire war in itself.". Response 1.2: The definition of Ally is "states that opposed Axis", not states which declared war on one (or multiple) Axis state.

Claim 2 - "Official Army of Albanians fought against Allies", Response: Arguably not true (2.1), "Potentially" politically motivated (2.2) and not relevant (2.3). Response 2.1 - First of all the official Albanian armed forces "after the invasion" were subsumed into the Italian army ^[10]. What you refer to as "Albanian forces" are (as your sources state) battalions of the Italian army composed of Albanians. Which, by the way, did not involve in battles as you correctly accepted. The only two Albanian "militia" groups you referred to as participating in conflict after Greece invaded Albanian territory, according to the following source "(albanian, translating ) "units Tomorri and Taraboshi deserted ..."^[11]. We have no historic battle records involving any official Albanian army, which battle? which date? what were the casualties? You are invited to provide them. Response 2.2) Greek historians are accused to have emphasized/exaggerated the claims of Albanians' participation to Axis in order to justify the massacres and the Expulsion of Cham Albanians from their homeland as Axis collaborators. (I cannot prove or disprove those accusations at the moment, but I only want to clarify the doses of potential political involvement to history), Response 2.3) That argument should be moved to the |WW2 Axis Collaborators page, since the scope here is on states opposing Axis, not groups opposing Allies. I can name Greek groups fighting along Axis, but that would also not be relevant to this article.

Claim 3 - "Albania did not participate in Peace Treaty", Response: Not true. The source of George Marshall is wrong as we have references from the original treaty documents.

Overall, I understand as if you are in favor of Albania's inclusion to this article, contrary to e.g. TheBanner, FkpCascais. My understanding is that you accept Albania as an Ally, but you have doubts on the complex situation and double involvement of Albanian groups with Axis. Is that a correct understanding, because we need to reach a consensus on how we move on? LupinoJacky (talk) 22:22, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

My source from Paulin Kola not only disqualifies Albania as an Allied country, but actually says that all countries were against Albania participating at the conference at all! and that only by insistence of Yugoslavia that Albania ended up being included.

More sources: Albania in the Twentieth Century, A History: Volume III (pags. 62 and 63) link Explains well what actually happened at that conference. Albania declared war on Greece, an Allied country, and its troops paraded along the other Axis ones when entered Athens... want more Axis than that?

Bringing the Dark Past to Light (pag. 33): "... Referring to the members of wartime Albanias Axis-allied governaments,..." FkpCascais (talk) 23:12, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

In fact, LupinoJacky, your claims are based on rather dodgy grounds. You deny the existence of an official government and an official army. But a government can exist without belonging to an independent country. And Albania was an existing country all the time, not an Italian province. See for example Italian invasion of Albania that states Albania was rapidly overrun, its ruler, King Zog I, forced into exile, and the country made part of the Italian Empire as a separate kingdom in personal union with the Italian crown.. So Albania did not cease to exist. And further in that article: On April 12, the Albanian parliament voted to depose Zog and unite the nation with Italy "in personal union" by offering the Albanian crown to Victor Emmanuel III.[12] The parliament elected Albania's largest landowner, Shefqet Vërlaci, as Prime Minister. Vërlaci served as interim head of state for five days until Victor Emmanuel III formally accepted the Albanian crown in a ceremony at the Quirinale palace in Rome. Victor Emmanuel III appointed Francesco Jacomoni di San Savino, a former ambassador to Albania, to represent him in Albania as "Lieutenant-General of the King" (effectively a viceroy). They choose a prime minister, the leader of a government. Why should they do that when there was no government? No matter how you look at it, that government was at least recognised/sanctioned by Italy and so an official government. The Banner talk 23:25, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear FkpCascais, Dear TheBanner, since Albania was participating at the Treaty officially, further speculative reasoning on how and who lobbied for its inclusion are not relevant for this discussion. By saying it was the Yugoslav who lobbied in its favor, you are involuntarily stating that it was part of the treaty. Second, the war on Greece was declared by Italy and its puppet-government in Albania was not an internationally recognizes sovereign state, and as sources indicate it "ceased to exist as an independent state" ^[12]. Please see the official statement by the USA Department of State "Italian forces invaded Albania in 1939 and occupied Tirana on April 8, 1939. U.S.-Albanian diplomatic relations ended on June 5, 1939, when Albanian Minister for Foreign Affairs notified the American Minister in Albania that Italy had taken control of Albania’s foreign affairs. Legation Tirana was officially closed on September 16, 1939.".^[13] On the contrary, Albania was invaded by Italy and by the definition of Invasion "An invasion can be the cause of a war, be a part of a larger strategy to end a war, or it can constitute an entire war in itself.". The rest is Wp:POV and wp:3RR as Gjirokastra pointed out. LupinoJacky (talk) 23:33, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

No, my friend, your edits are POV as you ignore the truth, the facts and the sources. The Banner talk 00:01, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The only one speculating here LupinoJacky is you. By your logic, considering that there was some internal resistance groups in Germany, then Germany should also be listed as an Allied nation... Lets talk honest, I don't intend to minimize the resistance efforts that existed in Albania, but that is very far from considering a country Albania an Allied country. And I am not speculating anything, I actually added to the article what the sources I brought really said. You later try to modify the wording a little bit in a sneaky manner lets say, then you accuse me of bringing no sources? I brought those sources at that time because they were the only ones I found that went in your favour (you should thank me actually) however despite that, you want more, but unfortunately no sources claim what you want them to claim. The fact is that during WWII Albania was an Axis country. What happened in the Paris Conference was that already after the war, in 1946, by opposition of all Allied countries but by insistence of only one, Yugoslavia, Albanian new communist government got included to participate as an associated power, not even considered actually an Allied country. So this are the crude facts backed by sources without any (miss)interpretations, which unfortunately you don't like, bad for you. FkpCascais (talk) 00:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

To resume, we have Albanian troops fighting both Allied neigbhors, Greece in the South, and maintaining occupation and fighting Allied forces in the North in Yugoslavia. There is absolutely no doubt Albania was an Axis country. Then Germans retreated their forces from the Balkans and the Albanian Partisans filled the vacuum. That was already at the end of the war. Communist leader Hoxha takes power and that new government that was not in power during actual WWII is present in the Paris Conference. So even if you want us to consider the Hoxha regime an Ally, it was already after the war. (_{Also, I want to point out how it seems that LupinoJacky is inserting comments without order and thus making this and previous discussions messy separating comments from the signatures, please keep comments chronologically}). FkpCascais (talk) 04:23, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

This last comment of yours is one of the most extreme wp:synths i have ever seen . You somehow confuse the terms 'Albanian troops' and Albanian state . Then you declare there is no doubt Albania was an Axis power when it has been established that Albania was invaded and occupied by both Italy and Germany and its legitimate government was overthrown . I start to wonder if your Serbian origin does affect your Point of view , at this point ... Can we maintain some basic level of communication here ? The Albanian kingdom under Italian occupation is listed as an Axis client state , however here we are talking about the Albanian state which ceased to exist as a state when Italy occupied it , for more do see Albanian Kingdom (1939–43) which was de jure and de facto an Italian protectorate . Let us not forget that Albania is recognized as an Associated power in the original treaty . At this point we should establish what an associated power does mean , and why this categorization does not apply for other countries as well in this article? Thus @LupinoJacky: if you can find some sources and definitions as to what an associatedpower does mean in WW2 , it would be very helpful , and would end this discussion once and for all . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 12:27, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Just make my day and bring this to AN/I as you threatened earlier. All your and LupinoJackys arguments were proven wrong and still you two go on and on. The Banner talk 13:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Be sure that i will , i need to establish the historical facts first in a crystal clear way . When that is done , and if this wp:idontlikeit continues , then the next step will be the A.N.I . I have dealt with worst , believe me . However it seems that you avoid the subject here . If you find it boring , then i would suggest that you find something more productive to do than reverting things that you have not an idea of . Obviously it is a pattern of your general behavior in Wikipedia , as proven by your talk page . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 14:20, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! With your last remark you proof that you are out of sensible arguments so that you need to go personal.   The Banner talk 14:24, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

(ec) Albania was recognized as associated power in that treaty already long after the end of the hostilities and the war, so even that doesn't change much. You are making an entire formulation based on "If A is B and B is similar to C, and C can eventually fall into the category of D, then A must be D!" You are obviously doing that because you don't have even one source saying "A is D", not needing to say that the optimal situation would be to have numerous sources saying A is D. And even that formulation of yours (A is D because of B and C) is based on events happening when no one was fighting anymore and the war was over (1946 Paris Conference). You asked for sources claiming Albania was Axis, I provided some. I asked you for sources claiming Albania is Allied, you failed to deliver them. Albania was in war with Allied countries. And even after government changed and a Yugoslav-allied government came to power, I cant find anywhere any mention of Albania declaring war to any Axis country. So by all means, there were resistance groups in Albania, but Albania as a country was Axis allied and never Allied during the war.

PS: I want even comment the background remark you made. FkpCascais (talk) 14:37, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes i have a source showing the original treaty , where Albania is an Associated power . Thus we need to establish what an associated power does mean , provided that there is a genuine interest which i strongly doubt . In addition for the n-th time you confuse the Albanian kingdom which was an Italian protectorate de jure and de facto ,- which came as a result of Italy's occupation and invasion (historical fact)- with the Albanian state . Italy was the one declaring war to Greece and not Albania . Plain and simple ... In addition , there was a massive ( compared to the total population ) armed resistance which fought against the two main Axis powers ( Italy , and Germany ) Gjirokastra15 (talk) 14:46, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Also, I am confusing Albanian troops with Albanian state? Is this a joke? Why do I smell that if that same troops fought Axis troops you would be here flashing them all around as proof they are allied? Those were the official Albanian troops. You logic is like saying US intervention in Iraq has nothing to do with USA, oh those US Army troops are fighting on their own... this US government is dominated by the Illuminati which in turn are Martians. So US intervention in Iraq has nothing to do with USA. Really? FkpCascais (talk) 14:59, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, there was popular resistance, but that doesn't mean Albania as a country was allied. You need to understand the difference between the state and the opposition groups. Also, after ending this debate, I intend to add to the articles what sources exactly say about that resistance. So count on me for expanding the resistance sections, but don't count for me at all to whitewash things now and pretend Albania was never Axis and was Allied. FkpCascais (talk) 14:59, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry, but for time being this discussion seems to be finished. If you find sources saying Albania was Allied, please bring them here. Until then, please stop adding Albania as a country to the Allied list and removing it from the Axis. Expand the sections that deal with resistance activities since that seems to be your focus. Regards, FkpCascais (talk) 15:02, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I am talking to a wall here ... Which state ?????? There was not a state , there was an Italian protectorate , after Albania being occupied and invaded . How can Albania be Axis when Albania was invaded and occupied by the 2 main axis powers ? This is going in circles , it leads to nowhere . At this point maybe it is better that we let other editors express their opinions . 15:10, 11 February 2015 (UTC)Gjirokastra15 (talk)

Which state? The one which had a series of Axis-allied governaments. The one that send Albanian troops supporting Italian war in Greece and kept occupation of parts of Yugoslavia. The one that even declared war to USA! Yes, it was dominated by Italy, but that was Albanian state at that period. We can, shall, and will, add content about Albanian resistance activities to the Albanian section, but we simply cannot add Albania as country to the list, much less remove it from Axis. So yes, we should indeed leave it to others to comment, at least we agree on that. FkpCascais (talk) 15:18, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Who is 'we' ? Speak for yourself and let the other editors express themselves their opinions . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 15:23, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

You said "we" in your last sentence of your previous comment -_- FkpCascais (talk) 15:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Yea , i meant you and me .... Gjirokastra15 (talk) 15:28, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Why don't you read Italian invasion of Albania? Especially the following quotes must be interesting to you:

Please note the statement as a separate kingdom.

Please note the statement: The parliament elected Albania's largest landowner, Shefqet Vërlaci, as Prime Minister.

So why do you deny the existence of a state (as a separate kingdom) and a government (The parliament elected (...) Shefqet Vërlaci, as Prime Minister.) The Banner talk 16:24, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear TheBanner, for the n-th time you are confusing a non-severeignt and unrecognized puppet government UNDER occupation with the state of Albania. In addition, it has nothing to do with the core of the topic: Albania was OFFICIALLY an Ally state as the Peace Treaty indicates (Associated Power is a synonym to "Allied and Associated Powers". Please read the treaty, it never makes a difference between Allies and between Associated powers, that is a fake claim. Since officialism is all that matters in International Relations, the rest is opinions which I would not like to further comment.

Regarding the lack of seriousness in this debate, I would provide you one example: "FkpCascais the other day, posted on the Axis page saying Albania was Axis, but unfortunately he had no sources to back-up his opinion and that he will search and bring proofs in the coming days." (Please everyone judge whether or not "Having an opinion without sources" is POV). TheBanner, on the other hand, does not have any line of thinking as to why Albania is an Axis, first he was saying Albanians fought in Montenegro, then he found out that those guys fighting there were not Albanian army. Then he said SS Skanderbeg of Kosovo unit is a pro-Axis Albanian force, confusing the location of Albania with Yugoslavia. Then saying Albania declared war on Greece, when all sources above indicate the fact that Albania was occupied by Italy and the Foreign Ministry was taken over by Italy, and refusing to understand the "invasion" status and the Italian declaration of war. I do not know if it is worth considering any more comments from these two users, given that they never had any line of thinking in the argument, but always oppose to every comment. (That is not the case with Constantine or GraemeLeggett, who have a serious line of thinking and they do not change it every day to oppose every argument in favor of Albania's inclusion to this article).

On the other hand, my version of story is fixed since day zero: 1) Albania was officially an Ally, 2) Albania was occupied by Axis and not part of Axis. 3) Albanians massively fought against Axis. Those criteria are sufficient ground to include Albania as an Ally, based on the definition of this article "Allies = Countries opposing Axis". Numerous references were given to all three points above, which make the case crystal clear. LupinoJacky (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:35, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the "lack of seriousness" you dare to talk about, I provided 2 sources to back up that Albania was Axis (want more?). You provided ZERO sources that claim Albania was allied. This comment pretty much shows your disruptive attitude. Take your agenda somewhere else and stop disrupting Wikipedia. Then The Banner aready pointed out so many facts you simply refuse to listen. FkpCascais (talk) 17:44, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Looking at the Allied/Associated issue, I found a copy of the Italian treaty text at [2]. at Section VI it says "The economic clauses of the present Treaty, applicable to the Allied and Associated Powers, shall apply to other Italian property and other economic relations between Albania and Italy"

at Part X Article 84 it says "Articles 75, 78, 82 and Annex XVII of the present Treaty shall apply to the Allied and Associated Powers and to those of the United Nations which broke off diplomatic relations with Italy or with which Italy broke off diplomatic relations. These Articles and this Annex shall also apply to Albania and Norway"

Both these tend to suggest that Albania is not treated as either "Allied and Associated Powers" nor one of "the United Nations" (unless 'diplomatic relations' is supposed to be a qualifier to the United Nations)

Further Article 88 "Any member of the United Nations, not a signatory to the present Treaty, which is at war with Italy, and Albania, may..." which suggests United Nations and Albania - the latter not being a member of the former.

I think a bare reading of the treaty while informative needs a RS commenting on it. GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear GraemeLegget, The membership to United Nations is an orthogonal concern to the scope of this article and not a criterion for membership to Allies, where the definition is about states that opposed Axis during the Second World War. Albania was inserted to the treaty through amendments, that is why is mentioned singularly, nevertheless that does not change the status of participatory along with the "Allies and Associated Powers", source ^[14]. In my inspection of the treaty, your previous argument differentiating 1) Allies and 2) Associated powers is NOT supported. I would really appreciate if you can respond to the claim you made yesterday and the subsequent replies. Can you please either confirm that your previous claim on separately classifying 1) Allies and 2) Associated powers is not grounded, or otherwise can you please provide two different lists of which are the 1) Allies and 2) Associated Powers of the treaty, according to classification principle you claimed the treaty infer. LupinoJacky (talk) 19:39, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Your reading of that Treaty is a very special one, LupinoJacky. And your interpretation is nothing short of falsifying. With the creative interpretation of the facts, I would really start believing that you are ready to argue that both Italy and Germany are in fact allied powers because they had a resistance movement. Please, stop with this. The Banner talk 20:02, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

You personalize the discussion. I am considering reporting you, TheBanner.This is far from discussing historical facts.

And the entire issue comes down to the fact that even if Albania is included in the treaty as associated power, it doesn't change almost anything. It is mentioned alongside Norway, not an encouraging fact for the Albanian being an ally claim, and, as GraemeLeggett said, it needs a reliable secondary source claiming Albania is an Ally, which you don't have. The reliable secondary sources which we saw analising the Albanian involvement, none ever mentions Albania being an Allied nation. And even if one mentioned, we would need more than just one so a consensus is created, and by now that is already established as impossible. FkpCascais (talk) 21:31, 11 February 2015

(UTC)

Since you asked another secondary source to close the debate, here you have it: One of the most prestigious books on World War Two is: Axelrod, John. Encylopedia of World War II. Volume 1. H W Fowler. ISBN 978-1-84511-308-7., page 823-824, citing:

The first peace treaty concluded between the Allies and a former Axis nation was with Italy. It was signed in Paris on February 10 , by representatives from Albania, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Czechoslovakia, Ethiopia, France, Great Britain, Greece, India, Iraq, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zeeland, Pakistan, Poland, Slovak Republic, South Africa, the Soviet Union, the United States, Yugoslavia and Italy.

The text is CLEAR and unambiguous, the treaty was signed by ALLIES and a former AXIS. In the list of Allies Albania is included, while the Axis is clearly noted as Italy. This closes permanently the discussion as the "Encyclopedia of World War 2" is one of the most respected and prestigious international sources on WW2.

Source is accessible online ^[15]. The source is present, it is independent, it is accessible opline by anyone and is undeniable in confirming that Albania was an Ally state in the treaty. Therefore, I would ask you to keep your word above, stating that you need one more source for consensus, and add Albania yourself to the list of Allies. LupinoJacky (talk) 23:17, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The only thing that is clear and unambiguous is that they signed the treaty. But as the treaty was signed by "Allies and Associated Powers", there is no evidence that Albania was an Ally. And that is what you still fail to do: give reliable evidence that Albania was an Allied country. The Banner talk 17:48, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Please read the source above stating that the treaty was signed by "Allies and Associated Powers" and Italy and Albania is mentioned as part of the "Allies and Associated Powers". The source is crystal clear. LupinoJacky (talk) 17:56, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

• This isn't all that obvious to me. Denmark's listed as one of the allies. With all due respect for the undoubtedly courageous Danish fighters, they were not able to put up an effective resistance and their war with the Axis lasted less than six hours, but Denmark is given credit as an allied nation. Albania's problem is apparently not the quality of their fighters, but the fact that they were invaded before the September 1939 date which Western historians rather parochially give for the start of the Second World War. (Anthony Beevor says it began on 11 May 1939 with the battles of Khalkhin Gol but the start date could also, quite arguably, be the Japanese invasion of China in 1937 or the Italian invasion of Abyssinia in 1935. My theory is that the September 1939 date has traction in English sources because that's when the war started to involve people who speak English.)

  The matter's complicated by the fact that collaborator Albanian forces did fight with the Axis as well. Arguably, Albania belongs with Italy among the co-belligerents; but the existence of Vichy French forces doesn't exclude the French from the allies list.

  Overall I think excluding Albania from this otherwise very long and inclusive list of allies might be a bit harsh.—S Marshall T/C 00:46, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

  • All I see in this section, are few individuals, which without any proper source try to manipulate history and change Albania's position in the war. If we take in consideration, that most countries had their fare share of collaborators and NAZI regimes, let me remind, the Yugoslavs had 30 groups of collaborators and particularly the ISC, Greek had 5 quisling PM and group of collaborators, fighting for the Germans abroad, and they cleaned their country from 90% of Greek Jews which never happened in Albania, the Vichy Regime, or even the Soviets had their own NAZI groups ( all source I stated in my previous comments), it is by no mean than Albania, with only 1 group and no action at all could be declared not an Ally. The sole fact that Albania payed nothing and instead had war reparation , is an example that Albania was consider an Ally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by QTeuta (talk • contribs) 17:40, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

• • Danmark had a navy flotilla in exile, assisting the Allied navies. And Greenland and Iceland were extremely valuable assets in the submarine was. Without the use of bases there, the Allied would never had been able to defeat the German submarines. The Danish resistance movement was not as useless as you suggest here. The Banner talk 17:48, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
• I propose to leave permanently Albania in the list of Allies following the clear sources given above mentioning it as an official Ally and also the sources documenting its contribution in opposing Axis militarily. If necessary we can discuss on adding a sentence in the text to attain consensus "Contrary to the aforementioned sources, individuals such as the Wikipedia user nicknamed TheBanner argue Albania was not an Ally based on a private collection of historic references not disclosed to the general public". Do you agree to add such a clarification to the text? LupinoJacky (talk) 18:03, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Bring one source clearly saying Albania was allied and we can discuss. Otherwise this discussion is concluded. And stop talking about other editors, we brought several sources. FkpCascais (talk) 18:26, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear FkpCascais, the source Axelrod, John. Encylopedia of World War II. Volume 1. H W Fowler. ISBN 978-1-84511-308-7, page 823-824 states explicitly: "The first peace treaty concluded between the Allies and a former Axis nation was with Italy. It was signed in Paris on February 10 , by representatives from Albania, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Czechoslovakia, Ethiopia, France, Great Britain, Greece, India, Iraq, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zeeland, Pakistan, Poland, Slovak Republic, South Africa, the Soviet Union, the United States, Yugoslavia and Italy." That is clear in stating that Albania was Allied as officially being a member of the peace treaty with Italy ending WW2. LupinoJacky (talk) 18:52, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear LupinoJack, we already discussed that source, but it never says anywhere that Albania was an Allied country. So not enough. Such a fact such as Albania being an Allied country during WWII must have more sources if it was a fact. Please find sources saying Albania was an Allied country during WWII. FkpCascais (talk) 19:00, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

I disagree, the source above is crystal clear in stating that Albania was an Ally. LupinoJacky (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

The source is crystal clear that they were not an Allied power:

but when you read a little but further you can read this:

This quote makes loud and clear that an "Associated Power" was not the same as an "Allied Power" but that there was a difference between then. As Albania was an "Associated Power" it was not officially an ally. The Banner talk 20:14, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, you are wrong. If you would read the treaty you would understand that the term "Allied and Associated Powers" is used as an atomic term when referring to the non-Axis countries of the treaty. I have read the treaty and there is no statutory division between 1) Allies and 2) Associated Powers within its scope. To me it is clear that the term Allies and Associated Powers is used as an atomic term, with interchangeable synonyms among the words Allies and Allies and Associated Powers. There is no statutory difference of the terms. If you think that Allies means something different to Associated Powers, then please prove me wrong and send me 1) the list of which countries are the Associated Powers of the treaty (together with the page where these countries are mentioned) and 2) the other list of Allied countries and 3) what are the statutory difference between those two different kind of categories (given such a difference exists, which I never found while reading the treaty)? LupinoJacky (talk) 22:20, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. So no other sources. Case closed. FkpCascais (talk) 19:08, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

No case is closed, if you ignore the sources that LupitoJack gave you. You are a Serb yourself and you should know better that Albanian Partisan fought against the NAZI hand in hand with the Yugoslavs. Plus he gave you three source on well articulated definiton, you only gave one book ( if I am not wrong) and you are expecting more source! I don't understand this discussion to be honest. QTeuta (talk) 19:53, 13 February 2015 (UTC)QTeuta

We already been here. Yes, Albanian Partisans fought, but not Albania country. And none of the sources presented says Albania was an Allied country during WWII. FkpCascais (talk) 21:49, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Case is closed indeed , all other editors except you two are in favor of Albania being listed as an Ally - although having some reserves since the case of Albania is not a clear cut case scenario- . Further war editing will be reported for wp:3RR Gjirokastra15 (talk) 22:29, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Gjirokastra15, a clear consensus is needed for such a controversial edit. As far as I can see, there is no reliable source that call Albania an Allied state. Some editors here are trying to prove that Albania was one of the allies by citing sources that claim Albania participated in peace talks, that Albanian forces participated in some actions, etc. We need a reliable source that refers to Albania as an Allied state. I don't see any such source. Sources that claim that: (a) Albania participated in some conferences, (b) fought against Axis powers, (c) opposed Italian occupation, etc. are not enough to call Albania an Allied state. Driving such a conclusion from those sources would be an WP:synthesis of sources, which is forbidden in Wikipedia. We may only cite reliable sources, but we may not drive our own conclusions from those sources. So, Albania should not be included in the list of Allied states unless some reliable source is cited that actually refers to Albania as an Allied state. Your claim that the consensus is reached because "all other editors except two are in favor of Albania being listed" is not correct because there are only five editors who took part in this discussion. If two out of five do not agree, that can hardly be called a consensus. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:06, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

First and foremost you might want to improve your mathematical abilities . 8 different editors have commented and 2 are against , of whom 1 is Serbian ( excluding you of course ) . In addition you might want to understand better what a wp:synth is , because as proven by the source which has been brought below , Albania is considered an Ally . Using elemental logic is not wp:synth . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 00:08, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Actually, only 3 Albanian editors, strangely all quite recent here on en.wp, agree on Albania being listed. Seems Gjirokastra15 is ignoring Constantine, GraemeLeggett and a few more that troughout this discussions clearly expressed either opposing or having many reserves about this, and all quite veteran editors. FkpCascais (talk) 23:21, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Do you include me as well in the ' recent to en.wp ' ? Last time i checked i had more than 1000 contributions and soon i will apply for rollback etc. status . In my understanding Constantine is in favor although having strong reserves . As for GraemeLegget , he has not expressed if he is in favor or against. Is S Marshal Albanian too ? In fact you seem to be the person who is most against it . As i have previously stated excluding extreme coincidence then your Serbian ethnicity might have something to do with it ... To be even more precise the coincidence is out of the equation when it is taken into consideration that you have NEVER reverted or edited in this part of Wikipedia but somehow you have the most posts regarding this discussion opposing and war editing against Albania being listed as an Ally . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gjirokastra15 (talk • contribs) 23:45, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

I actually believe that FkpCascais being a Serbian and opposing Albania is a coincidence, as are a coincidence his elaborations of the morale of the Serbian Army in the Kosovo War and his defense of pro-Serbian sources in the Kosovo Liberation Army article. Since his repetitive attitude on articles involving Albanians definitely is just a coincidence, then we should treat his case as a perfectly unbiased editor. LupinoJacky (talk) 00:20, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Vanjagenije the Peacy Treaty of Paris, conference of 1946 (preparing the treaty document) and the forthcoming treaty meeting in 1947 (signing of the treaty) are the first official plenary contractual agreement ending WW2 between Allies and Axis (Since Potsdam agreement with Germany was signed only by USA, UK, Soviets). It is not "some conference" as you relatively state, but arguably one the of most important official documents in history. Contents of this treaty dictated issues such as peace terms, sovereignty recognition, minority rights, the borders of countries, the war reparations, future prevention of fascism, etc ... Terms of this treaty gave shape to the post-WW2 world as we know it, therefore I think calling it "some conference" is not reflecting the true value of this historic treaty. LupinoJacky (talk) 23:26, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

@LupinoJacky: That treaty is certainly very important, I do agree with you. But, nowhere in the treaty is Albania called an "Allied state". You drive a conclusion that Albania was an Ally because it signed the Treaty, but, as I said, that is just a WP:synthesis. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:33, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear Vanjagenije, (repeating) the source Axelrod, John. Encylopedia of World War II. Volume 1. H W Fowler. ISBN 978-1-84511-308-7, page 823-824 states explicitly: "The first peace treaty concluded between the Allies and a former Axis nation was with Italy. It was signed in Paris on February 10 , by representatives from Albania, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Czechoslovakia, Ethiopia, France, Great Britain, Greece, India, Iraq, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zeeland, Pakistan, Poland, Slovak Republic, South Africa, the Soviet Union, the United States, Yugoslavia and Italy." That is an explicit citation, not a SYNTHESIS that I made. LupinoJacky (talk) 00:04, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

But, it is. The book says that it was "the first peace treaty concluded between the Allies and Italy", but it does not say that all the signatories except Italy were Allies. Anyway, the source is not very reliable as there was no thing called "Slovak Republic" in 1946. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:12, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Talk about irony here , some rows above you are giving a mechanical definition of what a wp:synthesis is , yet in this last comment you are doing a wp:synth of the most extreme form ... ' The source is not reliable because there was not a thing called slovak republik ? '. Guess what , a separate Slovak state existed during World War II (from 1939 to 1944 ) . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 00:19, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear Vanjagenije, you are wrong again I am afraid. Please see another reference, an official document of the United States Department of State, "Treaties in Force, A List of Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States in Force on January 1, 2013", Page 453, accessible online from ^[16]. Please see that both Albania and Slovak Republic are mentioned, so your synthesis is simply incorrect, while the source above was correct. There is another shocking fact that this new reference tells: Not only is this treaty important (as we both agreed), but it is still currently "In Force" according to the USA Department of State. I hope now you will accept your inaccurate synthesis on the source. P.S.: I think we should definitely add this official source of the USA Department of State to the text on Albania. LupinoJacky (talk) 00:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Given the relevance to this topic, I would like to inform you that the following article edit of mine was reverted by TheBanner as a "POV":

Over the course of the war, the casualties of the Italian and German armed forces were 26,595 killed, 21,245 wounded and 20,800 prisoners. ^[17]

In my opinion, such a revert is illegitimately labeled as a POV revert and I reported such a behavior to the Administrator's Notice Board https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Reporting_Illegitimate_Reversions

Therefore, I will personally not continue posting in this thread until a response is received by the Admins. The purpose of this message is to inform you on the existence of such a request. LupinoJacky (talk) 20:41, 13 February 2015 (UTC)