Talk:SAO Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia

Serbian autonomous region

I don't think that the phrase "Serbian autonomous region" is the correct phrase to use here, because it was never a legal autonomous region (like Vojvodina or Kosovo), it was more self styled by the breakaway govt. The way it was written in the article makes it sound like it was. Unless I am missing something. --Jesuislafete 01:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

There are many Wikipedia articles about things that could be described "non-legal" by somebody. The purpose of Wikipedia is not to writte only about "legal" things, but to collect entire human knowledge. The official name of the region used by the authorities of RS Krajina was "Srpska autonomna oblast" and that could be translated into English as "Serbian autonomous region". If you have better translation, please provide it. PANONIAN (talk) 09:52, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

ok, I was thinking along the lines of Vojvodina with 'autonomous,' i thought it was seen as an official governent. --Jesuislafete 09:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

But if we writte from the point of view of official Croatian government, then this region did not even officially existed, so it would be quite futile to discuss about its "official" name, right? PANONIAN (talk) 10:51, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Germans

Last census from 2001 show that, for example, 122 Germans live only in Beli Manastir: http://www.dzs.hr/Hrv/censuses/Census2001/Popis/H01_02_02/H01_02_02_zup14.html They certainly did not came back from Germany, did they? PANONIAN (talk) 21:06, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

"3 Germans are not relevant in a region with 192000 inhabitants"

Öcsi, please do not start revert wars even about those simple things. I posted wrong link in edit summary by mistake, but here is correct one: http://www.dzs.hr/Hrv/censuses/Census2001/Popis/H01_02_02/H01_02_02_zup14.html Perhaps you do not understand Croatian, but according to this link there were 122 Germans ONLY in the town of Beli Manastir, not in the whole region, and it is 1.11% of population of the town, which is enough to be listed as one of the ethnic groups. Also, here you can see that 1,796 Rusyns live in Vukovar-Syrmia county: http://www.dzs.hr/Hrv/censuses/Census2001/Popis/H01_02_02/H01_02_02.html PANONIAN (talk) 22:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

As you see I already have corrected it. --Öcsi 22:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

But if they are so relevant, why don't they are in the article about Beli Manastir. --Öcsi 22:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

That article is not on my watchlist, but nobody stopping you to list them there. :) In fact, I plan to post some demographics data into articles about municipalities of Croatia, but only after I finish this with municipalities in Macedonia and Central Serbia. PANONIAN (talk) 23:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you see here [1] Germans, I don't! --Öcsi 23:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

You see them now, and Montenegrins too. :) PANONIAN (talk) 23:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Year of creation?

One of my sources claims that region was formed in May 1991. Who exactly claim that it was formed in 1990? PANONIAN 16:05, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

What in the world happened here?

Not another nonsense state that never existed! There was the 'SAO Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia' (1991) and then there was the 'Republic of Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia' (1995-98). Who messed this up? There was never a state, self-proclaimed or otherwise, called "Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia" that existed 1991-98.

The article was merged without consensus in a way that makes no sense. Reverting in toto. -- Director (talk) 19:37, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I want to make it clear I understand that the current title of this article is not entirely in accordance with naming guidelines, and I would not mind if it were moved back to "Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia", but we simply cannot have a fake country covered here. I'm altogether opposed to a merge with the Republic of Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia article, and the a-historical representation of this entity as a continuous 1991-98 republic(!). -- Director (talk) 20:27, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

It's inconsequential, because it was indeed a territory in continuous existence between 1991 and 1998, first as SAO, then as RSK, then as <whatever>. There are no actual sources in the article that support this "Republic" name in the last period; describing it all in one article gives a less chopped-up overview. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 07:47, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

My priority is that it isn't erroneously portrayed as a single, unrecognized state existing 1991-98. It was only separate on paper '92-95, the territory was very much connected with the remainder of the RSK through the Republika Srpska, and enjoyed no form of independence in the RSK. All these myriad Serbian entities were pretty much integrated during the war.

These are all unsourced, low-quality articles, but I'm reasonably certain Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia was called a "Republic" soon after the remainder of the RSK formally "merged" with the Republika Srpska. It declared independence from the state that declared independence having previously joined it after declaring independence from a country that declared independence... :) -- Director (talk) 11:57, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

You make a good point about the SAO being a non-independent entity, and the undue weight of the idea of continuity.

I dislike the Republic title because a google search for "republika istočna slavonija" finds me literally nothing of any relevance. I'll tag the re-split article. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 07:59, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

The years are a good idea. I would suggest using them for this article as well, but there's the problem of consistency with the other SAOs: SAO Western Slavonia, SAO Krajina, and SAO Kninska Krajina. I have no idea how to fix their titles (we're not supposed to use abbreviations). The years might work for this article and SAO Kninska Krajina, but not for the other two. The only thing I can think of is simply using the cumbersome full title.. Serbian Autonomous Oblast of Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia might really be a bit much. -- Director (talk) 08:19, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

No, I'm not suggesting we drop the SAOs. SAOs were a pre-RSK thing and they were known as such and those should be used. Only this one leftover was an issue. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:29, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but its not a permanent solution. At present nobody cares, but at some point someone is going to point out that we're not allowed to use abbreviations like that. -- Director (talk) 10:50, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Why? I'm pretty sure I've seen the news media used the same abbreviation in English, just to make it short. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 12:08, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on SAO Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070212183735/http://www.croatianforces.co.uk/Eastern_slavonia_91-92_map.jpg to http://www.croatianforces.co.uk/Eastern_slavonia_91-92_map.jpg

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:27, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

A note on the title

It seems that we have a minor linguistic inconsistency in the current title. If we are using anglicized forms of terms for Slavonia and Syrmia in the title, then maybe, for the sake of consistency, we should also use anglicized form for Baranya. Also, in the official name of this autonomous entity there was no designation "Eastern" in front of Slavonia, and it was never a "SAO" (Serbian Autonomous Oblast), since it was established on 25 June 1991 as "AO" (Autonomous Oblast) and them changed its name on 25 September 1991 to "SO" (Serbian Oblast). And one more thing, currently we are using "O" as initial for "Oblast" in the title, but since the word "oblast" means "region" maybe we should use the English word. Taking all of this into consideration, proper title for this article would be "Serbian Region of Slavonia, Baranya and Western Syrmia". Such title would be literal and fully anglicized translation of the official name of this entity (in Serbian language: Srpska Oblast Slavonija, Baranja i Zapani Srem). Sorabino (talk) 11:48, 13 December 2018 (UTC)