Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:52, 3 January 2009

only 0,05% with 450,000?

maybe it's correct, but how come that there are 0,04% albanians when there are only 150,000 of them?

Denise Richards?? WTF??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.24.209 (talk) 00:01, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:CaryElwes.jpg

The image Image:CaryElwes.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. --06:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Related nations

In my oppinion we cannot write that Croatian Americans are related only to Croatians, Bosnian Americans, Serbo-Americans and Slovene Americans because if they consider themselves of Croatian descent then who are we to limit their related nations to some of the Slavic Americans and Croatians in general. I think that it is offensive to consider that Croatian Americans are only related to Croatians as if they were two different nations. Croatian Americans have the American citizenship and Croatians can have the citizenship of the Republic of Croatia and the citizenship of any other state (country) of the World. Direktor's position is false if he belives that Croatians are not related to Bulgarians, Macedonians, Montenegrins as well as all other South Slavic Nations. -- Imbris (talk) 00:10, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

The ethnic groups Croats are related to are Serbs, Bosniaks, Montenegrins, and (least of all) Slovenes. Its simple: the term "South Slavs" includes Bulgarians. An ethnic group Croats are not particularly related to (any more than some other Slavic ethnic groups, like Slovaks). While they are extraordinarily related to Serbs, Bosniaks, Montenegrins, and Slovenes. Therefore, there is no reason not to list the particular South Slavic ethnic groups Croats are related to, especially when they may not be anywhere near as related to other South Slavic nations.

While you may be Croatian nationalists, and you may dislike the fact that Croats, Bosniaks, Serbs, and Montenegrins are among the most "related" nations on the face of this planet, this is of no concern to Misplaced Pages, and is no reason to remove perfectly valid information. (Also, please try not to edit war. You're the ones trying to push this edit. It was contested, and I'm asking you to please have the decency to wait until discussions are over.) --DIREKTOR 00:11, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

This kind of behaviour is orriginal research at its core, who are you to insist that Slovenes are least of all related to Croatians. Where do you get such kind of information. It is not painfully simple as you put it. If you cannot understand Macedonian, why do you insist on nonsense that everybody doesn't know Macedonian which has lots of simmilarities with Bulgarian.

You speak of ethnic relations between nations and then claim only the simmilarity of languages as a standpoint. This is unacceptable.

Your "accusations" of a nationalist POV will not work here, as well as omitting Montenegrins. You are the one who insists on using a void phrase that Croatian Americans are related to themselves (Croats in general) and other Slavic Americans (of your particular choice). Plese stop this intimidating behaviour of expecting that your POV will stand in the article as long as we wait for someone to join the discussion. I will not wait for that momment in time because it is most NPOV to phrase ethnic relations with all of the South Slavic Nations.

Imbris (talk) 00:28, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

First of all, stop it with the Montenegrins. I did not originally write up the related ethnic groups list, and I obviously agree it is an oversight (which I fixed). Further, my logic is not "flawed". You are obviously trying to push this edit through with edit-warring. Whether or not your version is "NPOV" is your own opinion, which I happen to disagree with here. I can assure you that edit-warring will not work as a edit-pushing method.

Now then, please do your best to respond to actual arguments: not once did I mention language. If you actually believe that Bulgarians are as "related" to Croats anywhere near as much as Bosniaks (for example), you're logic is undoubtedly tainted by nationalism. If you need sources to prove what is basically obvious, you're demand shall be satisfied:

• "The Serbs and Croats are two Southern Slav nations having many common traits.", Journal of Anthropological Research‎, page 156. Note that Serbs and Croats are singled out as having "many common traits", not Bulgarians and Croats.
• "...it is often forgotten how small the differences are among the current warring factions ", Genocide, an Anthropological reader by Alexander Laban Hinton, page 335.
• "In one of the most detailed accounts of ethnicity at the village level, Bringa (1996) shows that (...) the cultural differences between the groups are negligible..." Social Identity, Intergroup Conflict, and Conflict Reduction, by Richard D. Ashmore, Lee J. Jussim, David Wilder.

etc, etc... I found this in 10 minutes, and can by all rights use it to source the removal of your edit. These scholarly sources are just a few of many that can be used to confirm the extraordinary similarity between Croats, Serbs, Bosniaks, and Montenegrins. Do you have sources that confirm the allegedly equal similarity between Croats and Bulgarians? --DIREKTOR 09:36, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

You often seem to be polite in your conversations and then insert something like "you're logic is undoubtedly tainted by nationalism". I would greatly appreciate if you could stop with such accusations. I would defend myself by commenting that it could not be anything less nationalistic when someone would like to strees that Croatian Nation is related to all Slavic Nations with an emphasis on South Slavic Nations. When someone oppose such opinion and insist on looking only certain Slavic Nations we could be speaking about ethnic exclusivity which could lead to more precise definitions. Enough said on that topic.

When you insist that we use sources to explain the relations of Croatians to South Slavs, we could be speaking about apsolutely no need of such a undertaking. except in the case of fulfillment of your strange request.

You have found unacceptable sources for the allegedly defining the Croats, Bosniaks, Montenegrins, Serbs and Slovenes as "closer" than other South Slavic Nations. The sources you have found have not proven your POV because:

1st source speaks about other peoples in the brackets as could be seen from the previous link.

1st source aslo on its page 163 is an article, or a chapter dedicated exclusively Vicarious Paternity among Serbs and Croats thus you have included it in your "evidence".

2nd source speaks about the war in former Yugoslavia and is totally unacceptable to be used in the discussion about simmilarities of certain South Slavic Nations. It is very well known that all of nations of Bosnia and Herzegovina were involved with the defence of their homeland (with different POV toward that defence). The author is concerned with politics, war, social structure of former Yugoslavia. The author is concerned with the common history of Yugoslavia and not on any fact which would pertain to this discussion.

3rd source is also unacceptable because starting on page 47 it speaks of Culture and breakup of Yugoslavia. The author(s) quoted "A widespread view nevertheless sees the cultural differences between the constituent groups as a basic cause of the conflict (cf., the influential analysis by Ignatieff, 1994, or Huntington's controversial model, 1996)." on page 48. The book is like the previous concerned only with the conflict and former Yugoslavia thus irrelevant. On page 50. this source says that the difference between Croats and Serbs is perhaps comparable to those of Norwegians and Swedes. The Bringa 1996 speaks of Bosnia alone.

Your method of decontextualisation is what is bothering me the most.

Anyone who has aspirations of unconstitutional acts such as the return of a certain joint state and all should stop with their greater nationalism.

Imbris (talk) 03:21, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh you find these sources "unacceptable", do you? That's a shame because, as I'm sure you know, these people were published and, to the best of my knowledge, you were not. I'm quite sure that any and all sources presented would be "unacceptable" because they disagree with you, and some excuse or another would be found to label them as such. The best example of this would be your marginalization of Bringa. Are you saying that Croats in Bosnia are not really Croats, I don't understand? Maybe the Serbs aren't really Serbs?

I have no choice but to repeat myself: Croats, Serbs, Montenegrins, and Bosniaks are amongst the most similar nations to be found anywhere. This plain and obvious FACT can easily be supported, not by one, but by a dozen scholarly published sources. If you think that you can disregard all sources I present to this effect by imagining some reason why they are "unacceptable" to you personally, and then continue to edit-war in the article until you've pushed this edit, you can forget it. These sources are fully in accordance with WP:SOURCE and I am completely within my rights as a Wikipedian to source my wording with these references.

For another example, author Kathryn Woodward in her ("completely unacceptable") scholarly source Identity and difference even states that the Serbian and Croatian identities are defined by "what they are not", i.e. Croats or Serbs respectively. Now, I know this too is an unacceptable source, but I was hoping you would tell me why? --DIREKTOR 09:10, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

CRAZY CRAZY!, DIREKTOR AND AlasdairGreen27 IS THE SAME PERSON

DIREKTOR ANS AlasdairGreen27 and others, are the same person, is a crazy little boy from Split, 19 years old, with the name IVAN RUMORA.