Revision as of 14:34, 24 June 2007 edit72.75.18.173 (talk) →List of mistakes/weaknesses in Croatia section← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:09, 25 June 2007 edit undoGiorgioOrsini (talk | contribs)548 edits →List of mistakes/weaknesses in Croatia section: ResponseNext edit → | ||
Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
===List of mistakes/weaknesses in Croatia section=== | ===List of mistakes/weaknesses in Croatia section=== | ||
#There should be a link to a Misplaced Pages article explaining what the term ''the West'' refers to, for unfamiliar readers.- ''At the end of World War II, many of Pavelić's Ustaše members fled to the West, where they found sanctuary and continued their political and terrorist activities (which were tolerated because of Cold War hostilities).'' |
#There should be a link to a Misplaced Pages article explaining what the term ''the West'' refers to, for unfamiliar readers.- ''At the end of World War II, many of Pavelić's Ustaše members fled to the West, where they found sanctuary and continued their political and terrorist activities (which were tolerated because of Cold War hostilities).'' | ||
* Use any good dictionary of the contemporary English.--] 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
#Spelling of a particular word should be the same throughout the article; in this case ''Ustaše'', ''Ustashe'' or ''Ustasha''. Only one spelling must be used here. | #Spelling of a particular word should be the same throughout the article; in this case ''Ustaše'', ''Ustashe'' or ''Ustasha''. Only one spelling must be used here. | ||
*Nonsense! Adopted spelling is ''Ustaše'' in this section. The quoted text cannot be fixed your way - this is against basic rules of the English grammar.--] 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
#]s always go at ends of sentences, and are not prefaced by phrases such as "as per" -''To many of their modern supporters, the Ustaše are considered merely victims of the (historically questionable, as per ) ], and the late president Franjo Tuđman even proposed to rebury them together with victims of the Jasenovac concentration camp, as a sign of national reconciliation.'' | #]s always go at ends of sentences, and are not prefaced by phrases such as "as per" -''To many of their modern supporters, the Ustaše are considered merely victims of the (historically questionable, as per ) ], and the late president Franjo Tuđman even proposed to rebury them together with victims of the Jasenovac concentration camp, as a sign of national reconciliation.'' | ||
*Which grammar rule you are going to refer in order to support the claim above?--] 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
# Sentences should be actual sentences, and not just side notes like "see this footnote". - ''(See also ).'' | # Sentences should be actual sentences, and not just side notes like "see this footnote". - ''(See also ).'' | ||
*This is a full and a valid sentence according to the grammar.--] 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
#Footnotes always go at the ends of sentences, and the year of the event should be included, not just the month. Also, it is unnecessary to use the word "official" in front of "criminal investigation" because all criminal investigations are official. - ''As per , "the Austrian authorities had launched an official criminal investigation into the widespread display of fascist Ustasha symbols at the May 12 gathering of Croatian nationalists in Bleiburg, Austria."'' | #Footnotes always go at the ends of sentences, and the year of the event should be included, not just the month. Also, it is unnecessary to use the word "official" in front of "criminal investigation" because all criminal investigations are official. - ''As per , "the Austrian authorities had launched an official criminal investigation into the widespread display of fascist Ustasha symbols at the May 12 gathering of Croatian nationalists in Bleiburg, Austria."'' | ||
*Which grammar rule you are going to refer in order to support the claim above? ''unnecessary to use the word "official"''??? Do not you see that the 'unnecessary' word is a part of the quoted text??? Which grammar rule demands fixing the quoted text???--] 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
#A plain-English explanation of the uncommon phrase "law authenticity interpretation" should be added. - ''In 2005, the Croatian government made a move toward the Nazi-era law interpretation and practice, by granting exclusive rights to the Croatian parliament for the law authenticity interpretation.'' | #A plain-English explanation of the uncommon phrase "law authenticity interpretation" should be added. - ''In 2005, the Croatian government made a move toward the Nazi-era law interpretation and practice, by granting exclusive rights to the Croatian parliament for the law authenticity interpretation.'' | ||
*Which grammar rule you are going to refer in order to support the claim above?--] 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
#This whole terribly-written run-on sentence should be split into two and re-written by someone who understands correct English grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax. Also, the English-language reference does not support the claim that the actions were taken "en masse" (the correct spelling of the term, by the way).- ''His concert, held on May 17. 2007 in Zagreb, attended by 60 000 people, who were wearing Ustaše uniforms en-mass, saluted the Ustaše way, and shouted the Ustaše salute "Za dom spremni" (For home(land) ready)- which prompted the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Jerusalem, to publicly address a protest to the Croatian President Mesić.'' | #This whole terribly-written run-on sentence should be split into two and re-written by someone who understands correct English grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax. Also, the English-language reference does not support the claim that the actions were taken "en masse" (the correct spelling of the term, by the way).- ''His concert, held on May 17. 2007 in Zagreb, attended by 60 000 people, who were wearing Ustaše uniforms en-mass, saluted the Ustaše way, and shouted the Ustaše salute "Za dom spremni" (For home(land) ready)- which prompted the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Jerusalem, to publicly address a protest to the Croatian President Mesić.'' | ||
*What are you talking about??? Did you read the reference at all??? In one of them you can read: "outrage and disgust in the wake of a '''massive show''' of fascist salutes, symbols and uniforms at a rock concert by popular ultra-nationalist Croatian singer Thompson,"--] 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
#Footnotes aren't supposed to look like this. - | #Footnotes aren't supposed to look like this. - | ||
<br> | <br> |
Revision as of 22:09, 25 June 2007
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Neo-Nazism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
Politics Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Archives | |||||
|
|||||
Militant Neo Nazi in Frankonia.
A militant neo nazi in frankonia. ITS ALL IT IS. Sorry if you dont want neo nazi's in frankonia but their just is. So stop slandering my work or I will request that wikipedia deletd the image as I dont know how it even became on here! ] 18:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)]
- Why would we care exactly where the person is? Why would we refer to the area by the name used on the Middle Ages? Jayjg 16:57, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Frankonia is always Frankonia to me as a rose is a rose ANYWHERE you go in the world. Middle Ages? Hmm... Come here... Alot of signs that say "Franken"! Why do we have our own dialect? You sir are as bad as Stalin. Usurpsynapse 22:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
So a nazi took a photo of himself and uploaded it to wikipedia? ROFL. --P4k 04:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Do you have evidence of that? If so we should remove it. If not we should remove that silly caption. ·:·Will Beback ·:· 06:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well User:Usurpsynapse claims that the person in the photo is his friend here but I guess we don't have to believe him. The image page was created by Usurpsynapse but doesn't contain any more information about where the picture came from.--P4k 00:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- Btw if you want an image of a Nazi (well, a National Bolshevik Party member) which claims to be a self-portrait there's one here. Part of my reason for suspecting that this is a self-portrait or a picture of one of the photographer's friends is just that that seems to often be the case with Misplaced Pages pictures of non-famous people in private environments (eg this one and this one). If the subject or one of his friends didn't take the picture, who did? --P4k 00:37, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well User:Usurpsynapse claims that the person in the photo is his friend here but I guess we don't have to believe him. The image page was created by Usurpsynapse but doesn't contain any more information about where the picture came from.--P4k 00:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- If I took and posted a picture of a building, maybe claiming it to be a historical landmark, would other editors seek to rename it, "A building some Misplaced Pages editor took a picture of"? Yes, that would be an accurate caption, but it doesn't help the reader understand the reason for the photograph. I suppose if we doubt that the guy really is a neo-Nazi in Germany we could say something like "Purported neo-Nazi posing with rifle". ·:· Will Beback ·:· 01:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Considering we don't know anything about its provenance, I'm not certain there is a reason for the photograph. I mean it's really arresting but it doesn't actually tell the reader anything. FWIW the original Wikimedia commons page doesn't say anything about the guy's nationality (or anything else). The caption I wrote was obviously obnoxious but it's a moot point now. --P4k 01:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- The text now reads:
- A militant neo-Nazi holding a rifle.
- Which is harmless. Isn't "militant" redundant with "neo-Nazi"? Are there non-militant neo-Nazis? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 06:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Croatia - latest changes
As to the anonymous contribution - it depicts the latest events in Croatia and it is fully referenced. However, I removed
a) blockquotes from the English language references due to the fact that those references are short and online accessible;
b) blockquotes from the Croatian references (the original texts and their translations) - due to the fact that the same references are online accessible and the other foreign language references here, are not quoted then translated - so, what I did - is for the sake of the section coherency and readability.
--NovaNova 21:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Why did you reverse those improvements and re-add block quotes and unnecessary extra text in footnotes? And why did you re-introduce grammar and spelling mistakes to the section? Substandard English grammar makes the article look unprofessional. And why do you keep making edit notes that don't actually represent the changes you have made? It's very frustrating to see necessary language and formatting corrections be repeatedly destroyed, and to see edit notes that don't even come close to accurately describing what has been done.Spylab 22:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Please, be civilised - support your 'grammar' alteration by quoting the English grammar rules, avoid selling the text mutilations as grammar corrections. Also, do not edit the text referenced in the language (Serbo-Croatian) you cannot read and understand. Acquire a valid and sufficient knowledge of the subject you are trying to discuss!--NovaNova 01:59, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- It's very obvious that neither you, nor the anonymous IP editor care about proper grammar, spelling, formatting or neutrality, so I added tags to point out that fact instead of causing an edit war with destructive and counterproductive editors who don't understand Misplaced Pages guidelines. As it stands, the Croatia section is very unprofessional and doesn't come near to meeting encyclopedic standards. Spylab 11:37, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- You are welcome to demonstrate an effective knowledge of the subject - in order to support your claims. As advised - be civil and avoid tutoring others about profesionalism (this is an amateurs encyclopaedia), standards, and rules. Profesionalism requires a valid and verifiable knowledge which you obviously lack.--72.75.18.173 22:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
List of mistakes/weaknesses in Croatia section
- There should be a link to a Misplaced Pages article explaining what the term the West refers to, for unfamiliar readers.- At the end of World War II, many of Pavelić's Ustaše members fled to the West, where they found sanctuary and continued their political and terrorist activities (which were tolerated because of Cold War hostilities).
- Use any good dictionary of the contemporary English.--Giorgio Orsini 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Spelling of a particular word should be the same throughout the article; in this case Ustaše, Ustashe or Ustasha. Only one spelling must be used here.
- Nonsense! Adopted spelling is Ustaše in this section. The quoted text cannot be fixed your way - this is against basic rules of the English grammar.--Giorgio Orsini 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Footnotes always go at ends of sentences, and are not prefaced by phrases such as "as per" -To many of their modern supporters, the Ustaše are considered merely victims of the (historically questionable, as per ) Bleiburg massacre, and the late president Franjo Tuđman even proposed to rebury them together with victims of the Jasenovac concentration camp, as a sign of national reconciliation.
- Which grammar rule you are going to refer in order to support the claim above?--Giorgio Orsini 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sentences should be actual sentences, and not just side notes like "see this footnote". - (See also ).
- This is a full and a valid sentence according to the grammar.--Giorgio Orsini 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Footnotes always go at the ends of sentences, and the year of the event should be included, not just the month. Also, it is unnecessary to use the word "official" in front of "criminal investigation" because all criminal investigations are official. - As per , "the Austrian authorities had launched an official criminal investigation into the widespread display of fascist Ustasha symbols at the May 12 gathering of Croatian nationalists in Bleiburg, Austria."
- Which grammar rule you are going to refer in order to support the claim above? unnecessary to use the word "official"??? Do not you see that the 'unnecessary' word is a part of the quoted text??? Which grammar rule demands fixing the quoted text???--Giorgio Orsini 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- A plain-English explanation of the uncommon phrase "law authenticity interpretation" should be added. - In 2005, the Croatian government made a move toward the Nazi-era law interpretation and practice, by granting exclusive rights to the Croatian parliament for the law authenticity interpretation.
- Which grammar rule you are going to refer in order to support the claim above?--Giorgio Orsini 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- This whole terribly-written run-on sentence should be split into two and re-written by someone who understands correct English grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax. Also, the English-language reference does not support the claim that the actions were taken "en masse" (the correct spelling of the term, by the way).- His concert, held on May 17. 2007 in Zagreb, attended by 60 000 people, who were wearing Ustaše uniforms en-mass, saluted the Ustaše way, and shouted the Ustaše salute "Za dom spremni" (For home(land) ready)- which prompted the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Jerusalem, to publicly address a protest to the Croatian President Mesić.
- What are you talking about??? Did you read the reference at all??? In one of them you can read: "outrage and disgust in the wake of a massive show of fascist salutes, symbols and uniforms at a rock concert by popular ultra-nationalist Croatian singer Thompson,"--Giorgio Orsini 22:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Footnotes aren't supposed to look like this. -
Homeland Calling: exile patriotism and the Balkan wars by Paul Hockenos, Cornell University Press 2003 Page 28
"Bleiburg" became a charge symbol for the alleged Serbo-Communist campaign to exterminate the Croat nation
Power and Persuasion: Ideology and Rhetoric in Communist Yugoslavia, 1944-1953 by Carol S. Lilly
Westview Press 2001 Page 109
The first books about the alleged Bleibirg massacre appeared after 1990 - based only on memoirs
Video, War and the Diasporic Imagination by Dona Kolar-Panov, Routledge 1997 Page 116
The story of Bleiburg was to fill the newspapers and to get considerable media attention in Croatia, and some of the media campaign reached Australia, but most of the members of the audience were not sure about 'what really happened' mainly because the 'after war death camps' and their victims inhabitated the blurry space between myth and reality
The Formation of Croatian National Identity: A Centuries-old Dream by Alex J. Bellamy, Manchester University Press 2003 Page 71
The crisis was resolved when Tudjman 'discovered' that among the bones already at Jasenovac were some returned from Bleiburg after the war, so no bodies neded to be exhumed and moved
Hopefully someone will correct these blatant errors because every time I do so, the corrections are unjustifiably destroyed and I am falsely accused of vandalism by people who clearly do not understand proper grammar and formatting. Spylab 16:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Before claiming something like 'by someone who understands correct English grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax' - you have to verify the validity of your claims by reading and then referring a contemporary English grammar rules/book. Generic disqualifications like this are un-clivil and offensive. Also, your understanding how an article shall be written is not a rule for other editors.--72.75.18.173 14:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)