Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Serbia/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Templates needing expansion

There are some templates needing expansion and perhaps redesigning. Please add any Serbia or Serbs-related template that you think needs work. New entries to the templates can be found in categories (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Serbia/Navigation).

• Template:Culture of Serbia ( ✗ Not done )
• Template:Vojvodina topics sidebar ( ✗ Not done )
• Template:Serbia-related lists ( ✗ Not done )

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zoupan (talk • contribs) 14:10, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Missing central committee articles

The League of Communists of Yugoslavia (LCY) is missing central committee articles akeen to the ones the Communist Party of China (18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China for instance) and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union for instance) have. LCY is currently missing 13 of 13;

• 1st Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 2nd Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 3rd Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 4th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 5th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 6th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 7th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 8th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 9th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 10th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 11th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 12th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 13th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia

Does anyone have a URL link (or a book) which lists all the members? --TIAYN (talk) 10:59, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Lacking substantial coverage in independent sources, is there any reason to believe that we need to create articles for each of those committees? bobrayner (talk) 13:42, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

@Bobrayner: Its like saying we shouldn't list members of the Syrian cabinet since independent, Western sources don't list them and give undue weight to Assad the dictator, and not the system which gives him those powers in the first place.. Of course we should create articles, and these Central Committees were given broad attention (at least before, during and in the immediate aftermath of party congresses), while CCs were given regular attention during their plenary sessions. Secondly, in countries like Yugoslavia (unlike the Soviet Union or present-day China), the CC was a powerful institution, especially after Tito's death when max tenure in the Presidency (Politburo) was only one year (and had to be filled by regular CC members through secret ballot voting from the CC itself)... Its strange that the organ, deemed by the party's own statute, as the "supreme organ" shouldn't not get the attention its deserves just because it existed in a dictatorship.. And really, per WP:Break all rules, what independent sources do and write doesn't fit into the paradigm their - if non-specialists don't give the attention the deserves who cares? Specialists do. At last, while its true that the media was controlled, the attention given to the Central Committee in socialist states in general just proves it powerful position. In general, dictatorship focuses on things that are important to itself. For instance, theres a reason why in North Korea, the party is barely mentioned without mentioning "the great Kims" in the same sentence, which is that the CC and the party aren't powerful in that country. In contrast, Yugoslavia gave a lot of attention to it. And again, per WP:Break all rules, exemptions have to be made in certain cases; WP:N is based on the assumption of getting sources from a democratic environment, and clearly Yugoslavia doesn't fit the bill. I must also add I think you simplify; you can criticize in dictatorships.. For instance, for a month or two ago, a leading academic in China stated that class struggle could never be abandoned, party rightists then countered that that was a lot of bullshit. In general, in communist states, like China and Yugoslavia, the press was not so much a monopoly of the party leadership (as was the case of the USSR) as a monopoly of communists (as in Yugoslavia and China).. It may look like a subtle different, but its a big one. [1]

On another point, a quick search proves my point, as in the words of the BBC; "The eighth session of the Serbian Central Committee, tedious though it may sound, was one of the most electrifying pieces of political theatre ever witnessed - and everyone realised that something momentous had happened." If the Serbian Central Committee is deemed interesting, I'm guessing the central one is more interesting.... --TIAYN (talk) 22:41, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

+ serbia has a list of CC members. --TIAYN (talk) 23:02, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

List of articles

Hello. Is there any list of articles that are the most important to this wikiproject? I was adding a lot of articles to my watchlist, but i think some more important articles didnt add yet. Is there some list of most relevant articles? Now i watch a lot, is there some default watchlist for me to copy? There is a lot of problematic editing and basic vandalism around here, and hardly anyone to watch. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 22:26, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

You can add this page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Serbia/Article alerts to your watchlist. Besides, you can add individual articles listed as Top (113) or High (567) importance articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Serbia/Assessment. The most appropriate way to resolve issues caused by problematic editing and vandalism should be reporting to the relevant noticeboards. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:14, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, i already watch Article alerts, but i will add those also!! I still dont quite know how to report and where for what, but i will try. I added that twinkle when i started using wikipedia, so i will try to use that a bit more. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 19:49, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Miomir Petrovic

Dear Serbia experts: This old AfC submission, which will soon be deleted as a stale draft, may be about a notable author. There are quite a few hits about his name, but they are not in English and I can't tell if they are even about the right person, or if they are reliable sources. Can someone please take a look? Should this draft be made into an article? —Anne Delong (talk) 19:07, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

ChumleeS-vandalism

User:ChumleeS constantly destroying articles about Serbs,for example Turkish Serbs ,Serbs in Hungary ,Serbian Argentine,SerbsLackope (talk) 17:26, 2 January 2015 (UTC)lackope

Emina Jahović is not a Serb from Turkey !!! You have no idea about what you are writing.--ChumleeS (talk) 19:08, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

She is Serbian-born person who resides in turkey,and we are not talking only about her but about your constant destruction of articles with valid sources because you do not like their contents.Lackope (talk) 23:42, 2 January 2015 (UTC)lackope

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Scope

Wikiproject Serbia template was removed from Talk:Vitina by User:Bobrayner because it's "out of scope" [2]. Is there any consensus about what is the scope of this project? Vanjagenije (talk) 01:36, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

This is WikiProject Serbia. Wikipedia:WikiProject_Serbia/Assessment#Importance_scale talks about "within Serbia". I venture the radical, outrageous suggestion that towns in different countries are not "within Serbia", and consequently they are unlikely to be within the scope of this project. I recognise that there may still be a couple of angry nationalists who seek to redefine either the word "Serbia" or, failing that, redefine the word "within" or the word "scope", in order to achieve a different outcome. bobrayner (talk) 02:27, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

(Redacted) comment constitutes a personal attack

The aforementioned page and its section uses the word "within" on three occasions, two of them are used jointly with the word "Serbia" to form the "within Serbia" phrase. But this very phrase is, AFAICS, on that page used for the word "topics" and not "towns", "cities", "settlements" or similar. Even if so, I must point to the fact that for example the article Jericho is at Talk:Jericho enlisted as (with)in the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Palestine as well as Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel regardless of the fact that in the lede of the article Jericho the city is located as in the West Bank, which consequentially is (also in its article's lede) stated as bordered with Israel and not part of it. Therefore I don't see any reason not to list the town of Vitina as (with)in the scope of project Serbia, given the previously mentioned examples. I hope that removal of the article Vitina out of the scope of this project, i.e. WikiProject Serbia, I hope that this removal was an honest mistake on behalf of bobrayner and not an intentional act which would constitute an outright provocation, I'd say. I mean, considering his thoughts about defining/redefining the word Serbia. I'd hate to think that anonymous user was right, although some past encounters with his editing could confuse a less good faith keeping editor. --biblbroks (talk) 18:23, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Interesting fact is that even the article "Kosovo" is tagged as being of interest to the Wikiproject Serbia (and also the Pristina article). The term "being of interest" does not imply any political position. So, I think the tag should be re-added to Talk:Vitina. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:48, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

• It's quite disappointing that you let obvious, vicious personal attacks stand, even when they're made by sockpuppets. There is something rotten at the heart of this wikiproject. bobrayner (talk) 20:46, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Telling someone that he is a nationalist doesn't constitute a personal attack. I've seen it used in Wikipedia without an eyebrowse raised. The other part I've read as being applied to us others, otherwise I would have removed it myself. --biblbroks (talk) 01:39, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Peer review: Glad (duke)

All comments would be appreciated here. Borsoka (talk) 03:28, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Problematic editing

This user is a sock of you know who. Can someone check edits and fix what needs to be fixed?

Kepple2015

I would do it, but i dont have time. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 11:06, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Ana Ivanovic (Serbian: Ana Ivanović) 18 months raincheck

Expect some of those here are familiar with how the ć was removed from Ana Ivanovic and given the Ana Ivanovic (Serbian: Ana Ivanović) lead, not much point attempting a RM if the two or three editors most opposed to her having a Serbian surname are still strongly opposed, but 18 months later, asking the question. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:15, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

@In ictu oculi: Do you have some new evidence to prove that "Ivanović" is the most common form in English sources? Or you just hope that opposing editors would get bored and not comment? By, the way, I agree with you and I think article's title should be "Ivanović". But, I think there is no point to start the discussion over gain if there is no new evidence. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:55, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Vanjagenije, of course "Ivanović" is not the most common form in English sources, why would it be for any Serbian name? In ictu oculi (talk) 12:56, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I see your point, and I agree with you. But, do we have any reason to expect the consensus would be changed now? What significant change has happened in the last 18 month, so that we may expect a different consensus? Vanjagenije (talk) 13:00, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

One of the main opponents of full Latin fonts (and vocal in the last RM) has since been community-banned. That and the last 18 months has been quiet with no reoccurences of the anti-diacritics activity. Also Wikipedia:SERBIANNAMES has now been stable and unchallenged for much longer (though arguably it still needs an RFC to be formally adopted). In ictu oculi (talk) 13:12, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, seeing other articles like Agnieszka Radwańska and Ágnes Szávay, I'm becoming sure that insisting on "Ivanovic" is absurd. You may try to run new WP:RQM. Be sure to explain your reasons carefully, so that even very unexperienced editors are able to understand the issue. Do not use Wikipedia slang and abbreviations. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

The most vocal editor at the core of local opposition to the ć has not responded to the ping on article Talk page. How would this rationale be. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:52, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

All European living people bio articles on en.wikipedia are at full Latin font per hardback academic book style, including the ending ć for surnames. This has been heavily discussed and repeatedly confirmed at high profile article talk pages (such as Talk:Lech Wałęsa) and in project RFCs (notably Ice Hockey and WP:TENNISNAMES). The only exceptions to this are a few articles where German "ß" has been replaced with "ss" or where moden Serbian "Đ" has been replaced with old Serbian "Dj", or where alternative nationality has been acquired (eg a Czech or Polish footballer reducing lettering after acquiring German nationality). Beyond this the sole straightforward exception is Ana Ivanović who despite being of sole Serbian citizenship was moved to ISO basic Latin alphabet in a poorly notified and attended RM of 21 February 2012. Subsequent RMs have failed to bring the article back to consistency with the rest of en.wikipedia's living people bio article corpus. Additionally the lead of the article has been edited to give a lead contrary to a second RFC WP:TENNISNAMES2 reading "Ana Ivanovic (Serbian: Ana Ivanović)", and the ć from Ivanović' surname has been systematically removed in August 2013 from all articles including those unrelated to tennis. For example Emir Kusturica article was edited to "Kusturica was appointed a UNICEF National Ambassador for Serbia, alongside Ana Ivanovic, Jelena Janković and Aleksandar Đorđević". Restoring the article title to consistency with all other European living people bio articles will automatically solve the lead and other article problems as well.

Sounds good to me, except for one thing: Ivanovic is not "the sole exception" as you say, as Djokovic is another exception. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:35, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

"sole straightforward exception" then change to "sole simple exception"? "or where moden Serbian "Đ" has been replaced with old Serbian "Dj"." doesn't cover it? In ictu oculi (talk) 13:05, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

I am not talking about "đ/dj" in Djokovic, you explained that well. I am talking about "ć" in "Djokovic". It is the same situation as with Ivanovic. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:11, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

@In ictu oculi: What's going on with your move request. Do you still intend to press the issue? Vanjagenije (talk) 18:55, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, unless someone else prefers to do it. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Translation request (Serbian language)

Hello board, please help translate the following from English into Serbian:

• Please do not contribute text in Serbian to English Wikipedia. Your contributions are more than welcome at the Serbian Wikipedia.

It will be used to create a template at Template:Notenglish.– Gilliam (talk) 20:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

@Gilliam: Serbian language uses two different alphabets equally (Serbian Cyrillic and Serbo-Croatian Latin). In Cyrillic, that would be something like this: And, in Latin like this: I'm not sure if that's the best translation, but it is certainly accurate. You should also be aware that, when written in Latin script, Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian are almost impossible to differentiate (see: Serbo-Croatian). Machine translators, like Google Translate, easily confuse those languages because they are like 99% identical. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:48, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

 Done@Vanjagenije: Thank you very much for the translation which now appears at Template:Contrib-sr1. I gave you the credit for translation of course. Regards– Gilliam (talk) 22:03, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject's colour-scheme

Change back to a conservative white?--Zoupan 01:11, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

That would be good. bobrayner (talk) 11:53, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Serbian language as an minority language

You might be interested to share your oppinions on requested comments I made last month on article Minority language in order to solve issue of Serbian language in ifnoboxes on articles of municipalities and towns in Croatia. I think that your involvement can help to overcome the fictitious conflict made by an editor that insists on eliminating co-official minority names (covered by sources) from articles by the claim that WP Croatia has a consensus to eliminate them from articles. I do not know anything about such a consensus and I think that he present his biased opinion as project position. Still, your involvement would be benefitial. You can take part in conversation here: Talk:Minority language#Minority languages ​​in geographical articles.--MirkoS18 (talk) 13:13, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Should this article include a list of the names of the Yugoslav National Army soldiers killed?

A RfC has been opened at Talk:1992 Yugoslav People's Army column incident in Tuzla regarding whether the article should include a list of the names of the Yugoslav National Army soldiers killed. Feel free to chime in. Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 11:48, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Category discussion about Serbs of Montenegro

Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_May_8#Category:Serbs_of_Montenegro. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:54, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Help and advice needed

Can someone tell opinion about one detail? Its here, and we really need a third person to comment. Thank you everyone. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 20:46, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello. Need advise again here. No such user was right that it was not the proper place, but now i think it is. Does anyone have a comment? here. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 22:59, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

As No Such User already told you, it's not appropriate to cherrypick wording from a court document, or to insist on the "unilateral" mantra. Our articles should reflect the weight of what reliable sources say. Stop it, Anastan. bobrayner (talk) 18:47, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Donje Ljupče, Podujevo listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Donje Ljupče, Podujevo to be moved to Lupçi i poshtëm. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Nikola Tesla

BAn RFC: Should all discussions and proposals about Nikola Tesla's nationality, ethnicity and country of birth (broadly construed) be limited to the sub-page: Talk:Nikola Tesla/Nationality and ethnicity? has been posted here. Interested editors are invited to comment.- MrX 20:52, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Serbian Democratic Party

There is a discussion about renaming the Serb Democratic Party to Serbian Democratic Party. Please, join the discussion if interested. --AnulBanul (talk) 07:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Serbian Cyrillic script in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Discussion at Talk:Serbian_Cyrillic_alphabet#Serbian_Cyrillic_script_in_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina, with the question "Should the name of Serbian Cyrillic script in Bosnia and Herzegovina-related articles (predominantly Republika Srpska-related articles) be simply "Cyrillic"?"--Zoupan 02:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Picki u dusa listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Picki u dusa. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Place Clichy (talk) 10:58, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

A user had the idea to redirect this page to Greeks and this page to Greece. I don't speak Serbian (I'm not even sure it is Serbian) but my senses tell me that it is offensive. The first one was deleted, but the second was denied speedy deletion because administrators were not sure if this is an attack or not. If someone can please confirm whether this redirect should be deleted or should stay, please express it at the redirect discussion. Place Clichy (talk) 10:58, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Remove "noble family" from article names of notable families with peculiar names

Should we remove "noble family" from article names of notable families with peculiar names, such as Crnojević noble family and Mrnjavčević family — move to Crnojević, and Mrnjavčević? "noble family" is redundant as the names are only used for these noble families.--Zoupan 18:58, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

I think that Crnojević noble family should be moved to "Crnojević family", while "Crnojević" should be a disambiguation page. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:58, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Primary use of Crnojević is the family, so I don't think a disambiguation page is necessary; the members section lists notable male members, while a family tree section (or article) takes care of the expanded list. Some examples of peculiar family names: Kosača, Crnojević and Mrnjavčević. I think that a disambiguator or identifier ("(noble) family") is redundant. There is a similar "issue" at Category:Italian noble families.--Zoupan 21:47, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Bijeljina massacre#Request for comment

Could interested editors consider commenting on the above RfC regarding the use of witness testimony? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 10:32, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Category:Serbian people of World War II

Category:Serbian people of World War II, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 07:20, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

The falsification (by the Serbs) title of the Macedonian 22:50, 21 August 2015 (UTC)139.168.133.149 (talk)Tsar Stefan Dushan and of "Macedonia"

In 1349 Stefan Dushan brings out his Statute Book (Zakonik). Today exist multiple copies of it, such as in Sofia (Bulgaria), Zagreb (Croatia) and the Ravan (Serbia) copy.

In these copies Dushan's book begins with: Code of law of the most virtuous and Christ-loving Macedonian Tsar Stefan, ruler of Serbian, Bulgarian, Hungaro-Wallachian, Dalmatian, Arbanian and of many other regions and countries.

The above can also be found in the book of Lj. Stojanovic(h)"Old Serbian writings and inscriptions", book 3, Belgrade, 1905 and in the book of Edith Durham "High Albania", first published in London in 1909, where it is recorded: "Code of law of the Macedonian Tsar Dushan, autocrat of Serbia, Bulgaria,Hungary, Wallachia..." In Historica Turcica, as well, by Feliks Petanchich ("Historica Turcica", 1502, Municipal Library of Nuremeberg)states that Dushan is tsar of the Macedonians and the Rashkans (Serbs)(“Macedonum Rasianorum Caesar“).

In the 19'th C the above fact interferes with the nationalism of the Serbian intellectualism which was in its infancy and the title of Tsar Dushan is altered to "Stefan, God-loving Greek tsar" (Frank Mikloshich "Monumenta Serbica").

Up to the closure of the Macedonian church (Ohrid Archiepiscopy) in the 18-th C (1767) territories which today constitute Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Albania were named Macedonian territories and individuals identified as Macedonians. There are numerous original documents that support this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.168.133.149 (talk) 22:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

What exactly do you propose? DO you think something should be changed, or are you just giving your opinion? Vanjagenije (talk) 15:46, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

FA nom

I've nominated Migration of the Serbs for FA but it hasn't gotten too much feedback as of yet. If anyone is interested in providing comments on how the article can be improved they can be added here. Look forward to all constructive criticism. 23 editor (talk) 21:24, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Requested move (two years later)

Talk:Ana Ivanovic. If this goes through will also request that the user who went through Wikipedia removing -ć from every mention of the tennis player be asked to revert all his 100+ edits. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:53, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

See also current RMs Talk:Agnieszka Radwańska → Agnieszka Radwanska and Talk:Marin Čilić → Marin Cilic for reference. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:11, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Живот и дело српских научника

• "Живот и дело српских научника". SANU.--Zoupan 15:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Liberland

Please see the RfC on Talk:Liberland. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 17:30, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

User:Joy, do we have a geographic names guideline, something like WP:SERBIANNAMES but for geo articles? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:29, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand the point of your question? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 11:24, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, User:Joy it doesn't directly relate to Liberland RFC, but does WikiProject Serbia have a geographic names guideline, something like WP:SERBIANNAMES but for geographic articles not biography names? I should have given context, the context is Talk:Gjakova#Requested_move_26_November_2015. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:46, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

List of Serbian Orthodox monasteries

Some help at List of Serbian Orthodox monasteries with summarization in notes would be appreciated.--Zoupan 10:04, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

WP:SERBIANNAMES

Should this mention "Dj"? In ictu oculi (talk) 11:00, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

I think there should be a separate Wikipedia:Romanization of Serbian.--Zoupan 10:04, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

User:Zoupan Is there a WP:SERBIAMOS somewhere? We already have Romanization of Serbian article. WP:SERBIANNAMES references this: "The consonant đ may sometimes appear as dj in some sources, especially when support for diacritics is missing, although the preferred spelling is đ." In ictu oculi (talk) 18:14, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Bijeljina massacre RfC

Your input is requested at Talk:Bijeljina massacre#RfC: Should this article make reference to the Bosnian Serb politician Biljana Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak to kiss the Serb paramilitary leader Željko Ražnatović (aka Arkan) Thanks, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 01:02, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Ivo Andrić

Ivo Andrić has recently been expanded substantially. If anyone would like to contribute further they are welcome to do so provided they follow the sfn format. Happy editing. 23 editor (talk) 20:35, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

List of state leaders in Year articles

May we have some further input here, please? Thanks :) GoodDay (talk) 13:24, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Mysterious article creator

• 216.8.146.41 (talk · contribs · count)
• 216.8.185.211 (talk · contribs · count)
• 216.8.146.77 (talk · contribs · count)
• 216.8.186.109 (talk · contribs · count)
• 216.8.146.96 (talk · contribs · count)
• 216.8.146.61 (talk · contribs · count)
• 24.57.110.189 (talk · contribs · count)
• 216.8.151.185 (talk · contribs · count)
• 216.8.134.155 (talk · contribs · count)
• 216.8.154.173 (talk · contribs · count)

We need to stop this person. He adds non-existing biographies to categories rather than creating them himself. Next time he pops up, please point him to the Article wizard. If he doesn't stop, copy his revisions to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Serbia/mysterious.--Zoupan 11:26, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

If anyone has time to go through the edits and create the articles, do so, and strike the IP afterwards.--Zoupan 11:30, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Serbia/drafts.--Zoupan 00:05, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Area of Zeitenlik military cemetery

The article Zeitenlik included the sentence

Greece has donated free land for the construction of the complex of 7 000 km²

That's 2,700 square miles, or over 1,700,000 acres, and cannot possibly be right. See Talk:Zeitenlik#Area. Please {{Ping}} me to discuss.

Cross-posting to WikiProjects Military history and Greece. --Thnidu (talk) 20:12, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Place names

What are your views on the article names of place names? Prnjavor (Gornji Milanovac) or Prnjavor, Gornji Milanovac? I prefer the latter, as this signifies a settlement, rather than a disambiguator needed for people or when the name is used for entirely different subjects or themes.--Zoupan 00:08, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

The latter option is better as it is consistent with WP:PLACEDAB: With the names of cities, towns, villages and other settlements, as well as administrative divisions, the tag is normally preceded by a comma. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:03, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Is there an easy way to machine-move the articles listed in, let's say, Category:Populated places in Vojvodina? That option would run into some problems with articles using X (village), but there perhaps is a way to omit these. Or else I would ask all active WPSRB users to move articles they bump into.--Zoupan 16:07, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

@Zoupan: Probably there is, but I simply do not know it. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:15, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

@Zoupan: @Vanjagenije:: For better or for worse, the long-standing convention for Serbia was to use the form with municipality name in parenthesis; it had the virtue of being predictable. I moved several village articles today citing WP:NCGN#Serbia only to learn that it has been changed at a certain point in time (I'm lazy to investigate when and by whom). I don't really have a personal preference, but whoever has changed the convention also had the duty to ensure that the articles are consistent with it, using a bot or whatever. There are still hundreds of articles using the parenthetic disambiguation, and it's still prevalent de facto. Thus, I don't intend to self-revert until someone proposes how to find a way to make them all consistent, in whichever form. No such user (talk) 21:05, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

It was Zoupan who changed it two hours ago, way after I moved the articles. Sorry, it doesn't work like that: you can't change the rules post factum and then ask others to do the work. I don't mind using the comma convention, but then find a way to make it consistent across the board. No such user (talk) 21:11, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Why would you not self-revert until someone finds a way? I mean, isn't it more productive to simply move when bumping into? Your revert of NCGN was kind of unconstructive; a quick check shows that only BiH and Serbia had the "dual convention" with parenthesis. I suggest you self-revert at NCGN, to start with (a de facto concensus is apparent at this thread).--Zoupan 21:14, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

The revert was just part of BRD cycle: I just think you jumped the gun too fast. Like I said, I'm willing to support the comma convention once someone lays down a plan how to switch to it simultaneously, because right now the situation is pretty haphazard. (The wording at NCGN is the least of problems once we find out a consensus.) I might even help out (I have a page mover permission which might be useful) but there are several hundreds articles to be moved, and I'm not really rich in spare time these days. Let's not rush into it. No such user (talk) 21:26, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I now noticed that it was No such user who made up the convention. I do not see why we should continue using parenthesis for settlements. Basically, the use with the parenthesis is a result of mirroring articles from sr.wiki.--Zoupan 21:21, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

"Made up" is a strong word. I made that edit in 2011, and it only described what was (and still is) the dominant de facto convention, however it came about (I don't know, possibly from mirroring sr.wiki). Since it hasn't been challenged until now (and I wasn't aware about your February discussion above), I have only been upholding it meanwhile, not with too much enthusiasm. I do agree that comma-style came to be prevalent on en.wiki (I think it hasn't always been that way), but I would like a clear implementation plan how to switch to it. No such user (talk) 21:31, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bot requests would be the place to go to in order to change the style en masse. The commas are generally more common in toponyms on en: and it would probably be good for overall consistency to switch to them. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 10:49, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Do we have concensus to change WP:NCGN#Serbia?--Zoupan 00:30, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Belgrade task force

As Wikipedia:WikiProject Belgrade is inactive, and there is no opposition for a merge (see here), WPBGD needs to be converted into a task force. We need to go by the guide.--Zoupan 23:24, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Zoupan: Feel free to do it. There is obviously no opposition to that. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:31, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

I've done most, and made a Bot request.--Zoupan 00:22, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Iazyges

Hello, the article Iazyges is within the frame of your project, and I have made some significant edits to it, kindly re-assess it. Thank you. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:37, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

RfC notice: The naming convention for free royal cities in the Kingdom of Hungary

There is an active RfC about the naming convention for free royal cities in the Kingdom of Hungary. Ditinili (talk) 18:59, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Cannabis in Serbia needs improvement

We have a new article Cannabis in Serbia, but it could really use improvement and expansion, especially from anyone who can read Serbian sources. With a little polishing, it'd also be really useful to make a translated version for Serbian Wikipedia since it's a topic of increasing interesting these days. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:01, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages

Greetings WikiProject Serbia/Archive 8 Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

• Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 18:08, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Serbian parliamentary elections

The redirect Next Serbian parliamentary election has been nominated at RfD, noting that there is no obvious target at present. Your comments in the discussion are invited. Thryduulf (talk) 12:03, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Possible Hoax?

It has been suggested that Montenegrin Krajina may be a hoax. Could someone please check this and if the article is in fact a hoax or flatly false tag it for WP:CSD. Thanks. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:16, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I deleted it as a blatant hoax. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:51, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Category:Serbian period in the history of the Republic of Macedonia

This category has been listed for renaming to Category:Vardar Macedonia (1918–41). Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 April 3#Category:Serbian period in the history of the Republic of Macedonia. – Fayenatic London 10:26, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Upcoming "420 collaboration"

You are invited to participate in the upcoming "420 collaboration", which is being held from Saturday, April 15 to Sunday, April 30, and especially on April 20, 2017! The purpose of the collaboration, which is being organized by WikiProject Cannabis, is to create and improve cannabis-related content at Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects in a variety of fields, including: culture, health, hemp, history, medicine, politics, and religion. WikiProject Serbia participants may be particularly interested in the following: Cannabis in Serbia. For more information about this campaign, and to learn how you can help improve Wikipedia, please visit the "420 collaboration" page.

---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:27, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Yugoslav Wars refugees and emigrants-category

So, I added Milan Mačvan and some other Croatian Serb refugees in Serbia to category:Refugees in Serbia, category:Yugoslav Wars refugees and category:Croatian emigrants to Serbia. Bozalegenda reverted the latter category with "he is not Croat, and not emigrant", upon which I reverted and explained why I insist, that he is not Croat but a Croatian [Serb] emigrant to Serbia, and next elaborated, and was replied that Mačvan could not be regarded as such, and that this was an untolerable stupid nationalistic provocation. My question is: Is it wrong for Yugoslav Wars refugees in Serbia to be categorized as emigrants of their post-breakup country of origin? I would like to ask the more active project members Vanjagenije, 23 editor, FkpCascais, Antidiskriminator, MirkoS18, BokicaK, Aca Srbin, NeroN BG on input.--Zoupan 00:37, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

• I think that refugees and emigrants are two different things. He can't be an emigrant if he is a refugee. Vanjagenije (talk) 08:45, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Even though (e)migration means "to go from one country, region, or place to another"? It is used when describing the movement of refugees to another country. A future category would be more descriptive (i.e. category:Croatian War refugees in Serbia), but as the categories are still so small (8–12), I don't see a problem in categorizing individuals as such for now.--Zoupan 15:52, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
    • I think the main problem comes from the interpretation of "Croatian". By saying "Croatian emigrants" you seem to be impliying they are ethnically Croat. I think the issue could be solved by reformulating the wording of the category to "emigrants from Croatia in Serbia". FkpCascais (talk) 19:15, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
      • @Zoupan: If refugees are a subgroup of emigrants, as you claim, than the category:Refugees in Serbia should be a subcategory of category:Croatian emigrants to Serbia. The article still does not need to be placed in both categories. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:38, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
        • Vanjagenije, that category is a parent, and should not be put under a specified (sub-)category as the other. FkpCascais, I think people have learnt Croatian≠Croat by now? I am in no way implying they are ethnic Croat, that is not the intention. That reformulation would break the tree at Category:Emigrants by nationality though.--Zoupan 20:24, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

References

• Comment: No, it is not wrong for Yugoslav Wars refugees in Serbia to be categorized as emigrants of their post-breakup country of origin. User:Antidiskriminator/signing template--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Serbia/Archive 8/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Serbia.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

• The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
• The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
• The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Serbia, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Rodoljub Roki Vulović

Could someone evaluate sourcing for this?Dlohcierekim (talk) 09:25, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

• @Dlohcierekim: I stubified the article. In articles about living people, every statement must be directly supported by reliable secondary sources. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:44, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Of course. I was wondering if the thing would be deletable. Were any sources in English? I confess I did not follow the links as they looked to be in Serbian, which I cannot read. As I recall, there were no inline cites, making the matter murkier, and ending in stubbing. Thanks. Dlohcierekim (talk) 16:54, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: Guess U can take that off my to do list. Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:17, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Request for comments: Attack on Prekaz

Editors participating in this project may be interested in a request for comments currently underway at Attack on Prekaz. To participate, please see Talk:Attack on Prekaz#Prekaz Memorial images RfC. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:09, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Serbia in the Balkan Wars

Is this project even working? Article Serbia in the Balkan Wars is in awful condition, it should be created from the beginning, current state is incredible mess. Can someone tell me who is knowledgeable of this period of history? Is there any editors who would work on this? --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 17:09, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't think there are many active editors here on WPS who would be able to help you with this article. Still, there is no need to worry about it. Luckily, almost none of the territory captured by Serbia during the BW does not belong to it anymore. Since most of it belongs to the territory declared by the Independent Albania in November and December 1913, I propose you to invite editors from WikiProject Albania to work with you to improve this article. I am sure that you will get much more response there and at least several members of that WikiProject will surely work with you on this. Very closely.User:Antidiskriminator/signing template --Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:13, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Undiscussed removal of Serbian name

Few days ago, I created an article under the title "Serbian Orthodox Cathedral of Saint George, Prizren". On the same day, article was reviewed under the same title. Soon after that, unilaterally and without any discussion, Serbian name was removed from the title, and the article was moved to Cathedral of Saint George, Prizren by an administrator. When asked to explain and revert his unilateral and undiscussed move, the same administrator refused to revert his actions. That discussion can be read here: Why did you remove Serbian name from the title of the article?. I am making this additional note here in case of any future debate regarding the classification of that monument as part of Serbian historical and national heritage in Kosovo and Metohija. Sorabino (talk) 05:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Vandalized articles on Serbian Patriarchs

Today, in short time interval of just 18 minutes (from 10:18 to 10:36) user @Surtsicna: has vandalized more than thirty articles on Serbian Patriarchs, by removing segments of their official titles in English language, and also by removing all data on their titles in Serbian (Cyrillic) and Greek (Alphabet). He did that unilaterally, without any proposal, discussion or explanation. These are titles of vandalized articles: Kalinik II, Serbian Patriarch‎, Kirilo II, Serbian Patriarch‎, Irinej, Serbian Patriarch‎, Pavle, Serbian Patriarch‎, German, Serbian Patriarch‎, Vikentije II, Serbian Patriarch‎, Varnava, Serbian Patriarch‎, Dimitrije, Serbian Patriarch‎, Gavrilo IV, Serbian Patriarch‎, Gavrilo V, Serbian Patriarch‎, Pajsije II, Serbian Patriarch‎, Vikentije I, Serbian Patriarch‎, Gavrilo III, Serbian Patriarch‎, Gavrilo II, Serbian Patriarch‎, Atanasije II Gavrilović‎, Arsenije IV Jovanović Šakabenta‎, Mojsije I, Serbian Patriarch‎, Atanasije I, Serbian Patriarch‎, Kalinik I, Arsenije III Čarnojević‎, Maksim I, Serbian Patriarch‎, Gavrilo I, Serbian Patriarch‎, Pajsije‎, Jovan Kantul‎, Savatije Sokolović‎, Gerasim I, Serbian Patriarch‎, Antonije I, Serbian Patriarch‎, Makarije Sokolović‎, Pavle I, Serbian Patriarch‎, Serbian Patriarch Arsenije II‎, Nikodim II, Serbian Patriarch‎. For this vandalism I had to report that user to the administrators, and here I am making this additional note in case of any similar incidents in future. Sorabino (talk) 13:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Oh, chill out. Surtsicna (talk) 13:14, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

@Sorabino: Per the definition of WP:VANDALISM, that was not vandalism. Take a note that accusing others of vandalism without evidence is a form of WP:Personal attack. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:05, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: Do you really think that edits of that user were OK? Why would anyone, in good faith, engage in systematic removal of wording "Archbishop of Peć" from the full title of Serbian Patriarchs in succession boxes, not to mention other disruptive edits? Sorabino (talk) 13:43, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

@Sorabino: "Not Ok" and "vandalism" are two totally different categories. Vandalism is never OK, but not everything that is not OK represents vandalism. I said that Surtsicna's edits are not vandalism, I didn't say they are OK. In any case, it is not OK to make baseless accusations against other editors. Vanjagenije (talk) 17:26, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: Did you even take a good look at what he did on September 20th in thirty articles, in just 18 minutes, by removing totally valid content? By definition, that is disruptive editing. And you are siding with such behavior. Sorabino (talk) 07:53, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I took a good look as soon as you made this post. I am not "siding" with anyone, please stop putting your words into my mouth. I'm just saying that the edits were neither vandalism, neither disruptive, I am not saying I agree with them. There was no "removing of content" as you claim. Changes were made to the style of infoboxes and succession boxes. No information was lost (as "removing of content" might imply). All edits were explained in edit summaries. Nothing disruptive. Vanjagenije (talk) 08:02, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: What on Earth do you mean by "There was no removing of content" ?! For example, he removed complete patriarchal titles in Serbian (Cyrillic) and Greek (Alphabet) from boxes. Why would anyone do that? Sorabino (talk) 10:42, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I see no problem in Surtsicna's edits. The titles should not be inserted in the name parameter as Sorabino does.--Zoupan 06:50, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red November contest open to all

		Announcing Women in Red's November 2017 prize-winning world contest Contest details: create biographical articles for women of any country or occupation in the world: November 2017 WiR Contest Read more about how Women in Red is overcoming the gender gap: WikiProject Women in Red
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 08:01, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Move request

Talk:Ana Ivanovic. It's Christmas soon. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:18, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Serbia

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod ^talk 18:36, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Movement of Socialists

Hello, I've reverted a few recent changes to the article Movement of Socialists. The changes had been made by an anonymous user who changed the listed ideologies in the infobox several times, and also removed a maintenance tag and broke formatting. This seemed like vandalism or at least nonconstructive editing, so I removed it. However, I have no idea whether the current stated ideologies are correct. Would someone familiar with the subject please check this? Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 05:11, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Why the Lang-sr-cyr template was changed?

Now we have the case where, for exemple, Gjakova, says in the first line:

Gjakova (Albanian: Gjakovë) or Đakovica (Serbian: Ђаковица) is a...

Now there is a wrong indication that Đakovica is some other language and that only the Cyrillic version is Serbian. Could people help in turning things as they were and making the template indicate "Serbian Cyrillic" as it did before and make an input at Template talk:Lang-sr-Cyrl? FkpCascais (talk) 15:48, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

WP:SRBPLACE

We need to reach concensus regarding placenames at WP:SRBPLACE. Prnjavor (Gornji Milanovac) or Prnjavor, Gornji Milanovac? Past discussion here. Is there any good reason why we do not follow normal guidelines as per WP:PLACEDAB? I am asking No such user, Vanjagenije, 23 editor, FkpCascais, Antidiskriminator, MirkoS18, BokicaK, Aca Srbin, NeroN BG on input.--Zoupan 03:29, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

• Not that I'm pinged, but IMHO a better example would be Palilula (dab page). If it's a municipality within a city, use a comma. If it's a village/town within a municipality, use parenthesis. BytEfLUSh ^Talk 03:40, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

• I agree with BytEfLUSh's statement, considering the section has reflected "If it's a municipality within a city, use a comma. If it's a village/town within a municipality, use parenthesis." for over 4 years, including BytEfLUSh's recommendation to use parenthetical disambiguation for towns to be added to the guideline. (The section has been in it's current state for longer than that, but I eventually gave up on locating its origin.) Either way, thank you Zoupan for informing me of this discussion via my talk page. Steel1943 (talk) 12:27, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I think generally, the comma is used as in Prnjavor, Gornji Milanovac, but I am not sure if that is the consensus, we should try and see globally what the consensus is. FkpCascais (talk) 03:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

BytEfLUSh, Steel1943, disregard that section. Why does this rule apply to Serbia only? We all know that "it's been like that for 4 years" is a weak argument.--Zoupan 13:16, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@Zoupan: I cannot as it is part of a guideline and it's been there for so long; as far as I know, going against that could be breaking some sort of long-standing and strong consensus. If you want to present a better argument for your stance, I would recommend finding when and how (was it added per a consensus in a discussion, etc.) the Serbia-specific parenthetical wording was added to the guideline, as well as possibly who added it. Steel1943 (talk) 17:42, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

• Since it's been over two weeks with no discussion, at this time, I'm going to proceed with moving pages per the way which the guideline is currently written. Steel1943 (talk) 12:57, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

There is no sort of strong consensus. It was added by No such user in September 2011. I call on the predominant and long-standing usage on WP:NCGN. Simple as that. Why have you, Steel1943, not given your stance on the matter? It would be a tie-breaker as no one seems to care.--Zoupan 01:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

But I did give my stance. My stance is to follow the guideline ... whatever it is. (So yes, I really don't have an opinion either way about how this guideline is written.) But, now that the origin of the guideline has been found, I shall await further discussion. Anyways, thanks for locating how/when this guideline was added. Steel1943 (talk) 02:08, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I explained why I added it in the previous discussion (/Archive_8#Place_names) – it had been a long-standing de facto convention, possibly taken over from Serbian Wikipedia, or who knows how, as it predates my participation, and possibly even predates the "universal comma-convention for places". As I said, I do not insist on it, and would gladly switch to comma-convention, but I do insist on the following:

• If we change it, we have to rename all the affected articles, and that's a significant task; I estimate that some ~1000 articles would have to be moved, so we should establish a procedure how (a bot task?);
• For villages/populated places specifically, for WP:CONSISTENCY we should retain the municipality/city name as the sole disambiguator (i.e. Foo, Subotica as it is mostly now) and disallow ad-hoc disambiguators such as Foo, Serbia or Foo (village). No such user (talk) 09:44, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm ok with that. A bot task it is.--Zoupan 23:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Disruptive editing

Note for everyone interested in Serbian history: take a look at recent disruptive edits and reverts by some Croatian and Albanian editors on several pages: Zachlumia and also Persecution of Christians, and Anti-Orthodoxy. These things are obviously coordinated and highly problematic. Sorabino (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Sorabino: You are actively edit-warring yourself. That is not the correct way to settle content disputes. See WP:Dispute resolution. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:33, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: Did you take a look at those edits and reverts? I see that you locked the page Zachlumia on version produced by Croatian and Albanian editors, and that does not surprises me, since that is your way of promoting yourself as an "objective" administrator. You did something similar when another Croatian user made a series of disruptive edits in articles on Serbian Patriarchs. But lets go back to the page Zachlumia - take a look again, you actually locked the page on version that has only Croatian designations! Speaking about the language, I noticed that you are removing codes for Serbian language (lang-sr) from articles, and replacing them with codes for "Serbo-Croatian" language (lang-sh). Why are you doing that? I saw that you are designating "Serbo-Croatian" as your mother language on your user page. That is OK, but in articles on Serbian history and culture, designation for terms on native language should be Serbian. That is simply the matter of pure facts. Today, according to official census data, "Serbo-Croatian" language is spoken by far less than 1 % of Serbs and Croats, and therefore information about that language is irrelevant. And for your "contribution" to the question of the proper name of article for Bogorodica Ljeviška, let me inform you that entry on that Serbian Church was recently removed from the list in Cathedral of the Dormition (disambiguation) because of the current pure state of that important article, and reasons for such state can be seen in the talk page of that article. But that is just the tip of the iceberg. Sorabino (talk) 16:32, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Sorabino: You're kind of going off topic there. Articles have talk pages, there is also WP:Dispute resolution, no need for edit warring. BytEfLUSh ^Talk 22:13, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@BytEfLUSh: What do you mean by "of the topic"? This is the common talk page of the Wiki Project Serbia, here we can discuss issues regarding all articles that are in the scope of this project. Above questions are also discussed on the talk pages of particular articles. Besides that, the question of language and terminology are of common interest. By ISO resolutions, code "sh" is officially deprecated and therefore the use of that code should come to end. Sorabino (talk) 22:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

This probably is a good place to discuss a topic relevant to several related articles. Not having a source to look at, if ISO has deprecated usage of a certain abbreviation, depending on their stated reasoning for doing so and whether it is consistent with our own policies and guidelines, that could reasonably be discussed here. John Carter (talk) 22:58, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Here are some basic information about deprecated ISO code "sh" (Serbo-Croatian). I think that here on Wikipedia it should be used only for specific designations in articles relating to Serbo-Croatian language and also in relevant articles on linguistic history of South Slavic languages. Also, we must have in mind that several thousand speakers still declare Serbo-Croatian to be their language, but that is quite a symbolic number. Sorabino (talk) 21:20, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

I meant off-topic for this particular section - I don't see much common in edit warring on those three articles with whether {{lang-sh}} should be used. Sorry for not clarifying that in my previous post. As for talk pages - I'm only now seeing some discussion on the talk pages of the articles mentioned in the OP. If that discussion fails, then it should probably go to WP:DRN. At least, that's what I understand if I'm interpreting the rules correctly. I'm not saying that you shouldn't have also posted it here too, just that I noticed a lack of discussion on article talk pages. BytEfLUSh ^Talk 23:27, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Yugoslavia vs. Serbia and Montenegro at the Olympics

Hello, we would like your input on where FR Yugoslavia's results at the Olympics should be listed. Here is the relevant discussion. JoshMartini007 (talk) 18:30, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians to be moved to Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment. This page is of interest to several relating WikiProjects and interested users may want to participate in the discussion here. Sorabino (talk) 21:47, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Way to go @Sorabino:. I actually have no say to the matter there, but it is great you bring it to the atention of the community, thanks a lot! FkpCascais (talk) 22:21, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Title: "Slavic paganism" or "Slavic religion"?

More opinions needed in this discussion.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 07:36, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Serbia and Yugoslavia at the Olympics

I am asking editors here please to pay attention to the discussions taking place regarding this issue. I opened a new thread at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Olympics#Serbia/Yugoslavia_broader_discussion, I will ask you please to spend a little time and give a tought on the discussion so a consensus could be reached. FkpCascais (talk) 22:00, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Focus on Serbia at Women in Red

In May 2018, in conjunction with m:Wikimedia CEE Spring 2018/Article Lists, Women in Red is focusing on the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. We hope there will be contributions on Serbian women.

		Welcome to Women in Red's May 2018 worldwide online editathons. File:Soraya Aghaee4.jpg New: "Women of the Sea" New: "Villains" New: "Women in Sports" New: "Central and Eastern European women" Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 15:43, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:55, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Can anyone help translate?

I'm having difficulty explaining to an editor that articles need sources, and asking what the source of his recent creation was. The editor is Serbian. Can anyone help at User talk:SrpskiAnonimac? Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 13:21, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Boleyn: It looks to me like the two of you are communicating without problems. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:39, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: After reading the conversation, I can only come to the conclusion that that's a gross overstatement. =) However, no conflict so far, but let's keep an eye on it. byteflush _Talk 01:57, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: I messed up the ping byteflush _Talk 01:58, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Vanjagenije and Byteflash. The communication is slightly improved but is still not without problems. I'm unclear if this editor understands about sourcing etc., and I think they could do with someone helping them, especially as they state that they don't actually speak English, just use a translation app. I'm not anticipating any conflict at all, I think I'm just confusing the editor and that they are struggling - if anyone is able to offer them any help in a language they may understand, it could be helpful. Thanks for looking into it, Boleyn (talk) 11:10, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Aca Lukas

While I understand that Aca Lukas is popular in Serbia and almost certainly notable for a Wikipedia article, I'm having a hard time finding reliable sources (the BLP currently has none). I thought of placing WP:PROD, but I think sources could be found (and I know I'm often really bad at finding them), and I would get called out for doing it in bad faith. So, if someone could take a look at the article and perhaps add a ref or a dozen, that'd be great. =) byteflush _Talk 23:22, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Requested move discussion needing more input

See Talk:Yugoslav Army in the Fatherland order of battle#Requested move 21 August 2018. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:15, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Requested move discussion needing more input

See Talk:Moving of the Serbian Industry. All the best.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:39, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Requested move discussion needing more input

See Talk:Central National Committee of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia#Requested move 24 September 2018. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:35, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Alimpije Marjanovic

All the references for Draft:Alimpije Marjanovic are in (I assume) Serbian. I need assistance evaluating them. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:05, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

FWIW, it's all a single reference, which might be available on Scribd [3], but I can't access it right now. There are short mentions about the subject here and here. Peacemaker67 might have access to something more, although his field is WW2 rather than WW1. No such user (talk) 14:28, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Peacemaker67, actually. No such user (talk) 14:29, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

RfC on election/referendum naming format

An RfC on moving the year from the end to the start of article titles (e.g. South African general election, 2019 to 2019 South African general election) has been reopened for further comment, including on whether a bot could be used move the articles if it closed in favour of the change: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (government and legislation)#Proposed change to election/referendum naming format. Cheers, Number 57 15:40, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Dolac: two different places?

I can't figure out why there are two separate articles for Dolac (Bela Palanka) and Dolac (village). They are both settlements in the municipality of Bela Palanka, the coordinates appear to be the same, and yet there are two different articles (including on the Serbian wikipedia) with different population figures. What's going on? Are these two different administrative units centred on the same village? – Uanfala (talk) 15:10, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Serbian population census of 2011 registers two different inhabited places in the Bela Palanka municipality, one named "Dolac settlement", the other named "Dolac village" (see [4]). Vanjagenije (talk) 22:32, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Requested move discussion needing more input

See Talk:Raška (region). Thanks. Sorabino (talk) 13:21, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

RfC - Operation Storm

There is a RfC that is of interest to this project here. Feel free to have your say. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Organ theft in Kosovo

What has just happened here? It seems that entire article Organ theft in Kosovo has just been transformed into a simple redirect, after it was proposed for deletion. That proposal was placed on five deletion sorting lists, but not on Deletion_sorting/Serbia. Discussion was limited to only 4 (four) participants, two of them advocating deletion, the other two making some valid points regarding the entire procedure and proposing relisting, or merger of relevant content. In spite of that, close was "redirect", not even "merger". That option was mentioned as pure possibility. Compare that limited discussion and its outcome with RM from 2012. It seems to me that current close was not done properly. Sorabino (talk) 22:46, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

"Serbo-Croatian"

A discussion related to ISO classification of "Serbo-Croatian" as a linguistic cluster, or macrolanguage, consisting of four individual languages, is taking place here. Feel free to join the discussion. Sorabino (talk) 11:42, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

WP 1.0 Bot Beta

Hello! Your WikiProject has been selected to participate in the WP 1.0 Bot rewrite beta. This means that, starting in the next few days or weeks, your assessment tables will be updated using code in the new bot, codenamed Lucky. You can read more about this change on the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team page. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 06:47, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Hamlet in popular culture

Hello! Is anyone interested in finding a decent source for the paragraph on Riblja Čorba in this article? Basically, something RS that says "yep, that album was inspired by Hamlet." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:20, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Help needed regarding "Frisian Legion" and related edits

Could anybody speaking Serbian have a look at and help with the issues raised at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#"Frisian Legion" and related edits (permalink)? Thanks, Sam Sailor 12:32, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Serbianisation

I would like to use this opportunity to invite fellow editors to visit the Serbianisation page and take a constructive part in the discussion and help other editors with references etc. :) Mm.srb (talk) 17:40, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Discussion invitation

Hi. I invite users here to a discussion on map coloring for the UN. Wadaad (talk) 08:53, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Translation needed

Could somebody please translate into English the Description field at File:Милутин Бабовић Телеграф са два своја сина, 1912.jpg? If you could upload the translation right back to the same page, that would be most useful. Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:21, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm in a hurry, but here is a qucik version which we can further work on. Milutin Bobović Telegraf - hajduk and chetnik from the village of Police near Pljevlja with his two sons Mihailo and Milić, 1912. Alongside the activity as a hajduk which included him intruding/getting in from Serbia to Montenegro, Milutin did the the secretive service as the official courier between royal courts in Belgrade and Cetinje. At the times in which it was dangerous to write down anything, monarchs would simply tell Milutin the message and that's how he got his nickname - Telegraf. Sadko (talk) 09:32, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

DBPD

Hello! Could use some help finding Serbian sources for this topic, even if it's just merged into Anarchism in Serbia. Not finding anything in English. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 01:47, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

@Sadko: Czar asked for the sources on DBPD. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: Missed it. I have no doubt that you will help him out. Sadko (talk) 13:07, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Minority Languages ​​in Country Article Infobox (Serbia)

Hello, I guess that some of you may be interested to express your opinion on RfC if the country infobox (Serbia in this case) should contain "Recognised regional or minority languages" or should they be removed. The RfC can be seen on THIS LINK. Best regards and thank you for your contribution.--MirkoS18 (talk) 21:33, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Vuk Karadžić

Commentary and/or engagement would be welcome at the article Vuk Karadžić regarding whether he was Serbian, which is contested by an IP editor. Thanks. Doremo (talk) 11:46, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

There is no doubt about it. The intro line can not change that. We are just following a policy. Sadko (talk) 20:23, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Kulen Vakuf massacre

Hi,

I wrote an article about Kulen Vakuf massacre. After I finished editing this article I realized there is one major and quite obvious mistake with it. I don't think there are major issues with following wikipedia policies. I think there is a mistake on major, conceptual level. To check if my perspective is right I deliberatelly asked several editors (members of WP Croatia and WP Bosnia and Herzegovina) with whom I had numerous disputes in past (having different perspective than me), what they think about this article, but I have not received any confirmation or denial of my perception. Before I ask members of WP Albania about it (the project I am most active at) I would appreciate if members of WP Serbia could check if my concerns about this article are justified?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:55, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@Antidiskriminator: And, what are you concerns? Vanjagenije (talk) 21:45, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: thank you for your reply. I prepared my famous Kazandibi award for editor who will see it without me pointing at it. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Antidiskriminator: So, you expect us to comment on your concerns without reveling those concerns to us? Vanjagenije (talk) 22:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

A kind of (I wish you could formulate it without we-you perspective). If my question is something bad, I sincerely appologize. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:56, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

In that case, I'd say I completely agree with you. I think your concerns are correct and you should proceed with correcting the article. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:16, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

I am afraid that it would be impossible to do and still respect wikipedia policies. Nevertheless, the subtle magnetism of your comment earned you my award, nevertheless. Congratulations!--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Category:Demographics of the Western Balkans has been nominated for discussion

Category:Demographics of the Western Balkans has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 14:57, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Cyrillic el

There is a discussion at WP:VPT#Cyrillic letter el about the alternative form (Ʌ ʌ) of the Cyrillic letter el, which is used in the Serbian language which members of this WikiProject may wish to join. Mjroots (talk) 06:32, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Make WikiProject Ottoman Empire a task force of Wikipedia:WikiProject Former countries?

Dear users of this WikiProject:

At Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Former_countries#Make_WikiProject_Ottoman_Empire_a_task_force_of_Wikipedia:WikiProject_Former_countries? I have left a proposal to convert Wikipedia:WikiProject Ottoman Empire into a task force of Wikipedia:WikiProject Former countries. I asked this project (as all or parts of this country was/were formerly in the Ottoman Empire) and several other projects to get further feedback. Please let me know if you have questions, comments, or objections.

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 02:03, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Assessment page, updated

Greetings, For Serbia WP assessment statistics, I added progression, pie graphs, rainbow. JoeNMLC (talk) 19:09, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Is this project active?

In ictu oculi (talk) 20:55, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

I think it is. Editors who are members of this project and survived until now follow notifications and alerts related to this project and participate in appropriate discussions. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:29, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

It is. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 21:32, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

is WP:SERBIANNAMES relevant to titles now? In ictu oculi (talk)

I think not. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

In what way? In ictu oculi (talk) 15:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

In a way that wider community has not reached consensus about it. Having in mind the current vague text is basically attempt to codify Latin script transliteration I doubt it will ever gain community consensus having in mind that the official script in Serbia is Cyrillic.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

It's not the guideline I'm familiar with, but yes, it codifies the existing practice. It's relatively vague though, only recommending that the names are "transliterated" into Serbian Latin alphabet, not mentioning the possible exceptions. Let me guess, Ana Ivanovic RM, again? No such user (talk) 20:24, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

You said it not me. In ictu oculi (talk) 20:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Translation needed, and WP:RS evaluation

Could somebody who reads Serbian please look at https://prvisvetskirat.rs/licnosti/ucesnici-ratova/mihailovic-j-mihailo/ and tell me if it looks like a WP:RS? Based on the automated Google translation, Draft:Mihailo J. Mihailović is an extensive copyvio of this page. I would make an attempt to rescue the draft, but I don't know if I should use this source or not. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@RoySmith:. "Удружење грађана које се залаже и бори за заштиту животне средине и очување културног и историјског наслеђа српског народа...Association of citizens that advocates and fights for the protection of the environment and preservation of the cultural and historical heritage of the Serbian people." [5] I don't think it's RS. Mikola22 (talk) 20:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Mikola22, Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:34, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

RoySmith It's okay, it's not ideal but it can be used. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 23:02, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Please don't trust editor Sadko, we already had problems with his "sources". It is private page of association of citizens, there is no academic control, review, author, source of information etc. Anyone can write anything here and this is not RS.

• From page: "Аманет је идеја настала 2017. године, којом би се независним и/или аматерским историчарима, публицистима и ствараоцима у области културе, и активистима на заштити животне средине помогло да на најбољи начин презентују свој рад...Amanet is an idea created in 2017, which would help independent and / or amateur historians, publicists and creators in the field of culture, and environmental activists to present their work in the best possible way. Уколико имате добру идеју или сматрате да Ваше истраживање и рад заслужују да имају своје посебно место на интернету, а немате средстава и/или времена, или не познајете довољно ову област, молимо Вас да нас контактирате. Бићемо Вам на располагању..If you have a good idea or think that your research and work deserve to have their special place on the Internet, and you do not have the resources and / or time, or you do not know enough about this area, please contact us. We will be at your disposal. Mikola22 (talk) 06:29, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Need a native speaker for verifiability

We have a little discussion at Talk:Our Lady of Medjugorje... or rather a dispute. One user needs a confrimation that I'm not misusing Croatian sources. So, is there anyone available to check them? Thanks. --Governor Sheng (talk) 01:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

First women MP(s) in Serbia

Hello. I'm compiling a list of the first women MPs in each country, but have been unable to find the answer for Serbia. I'm guessing they would have been elected in the 1945 Yugoslavian parliamentary election or possibly one of the early elections to the legislature of SR Serbia. If anyone can point me to a definitive source, it would be much appreciated. Cheers, Number 57 18:05, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Our Lady of Medjugorje

Please help by joining the discussion at Talk:Our Lady of Medjugorje. --Governor Sheng (talk) 16:46, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Turbo-folk compilation albums

A tag has been placed on Category:Turbo-folk compilation albums requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. --David Tornheim (talk) 15:50, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Teodora Bojović

I don't see how this singer passes WP:MUSICBIO. If she is notable, then please fix the issues as tagged. If not, please ping me and I'll send it to WP:AfD. Bearian (talk) 00:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

User:Santasa99

I've recently come across User:Santasa99 who seems to be in the habit of making bold edits in relation to Balkan topics. I don't have enough knowledge to judge, but could someone take a look to see if they're editing with a WP:Neutral point of view? TIA Le Deluge (talk) 15:45, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

And you are going to find NPOV here, on Project Serbia? Why not alert all Balkan communities? Why not alert projects on medieval history and history? Your snooping into my contributions, and then alerting only one, deeply involved community, which has already shown tendencies to tag teaming, is nothing short of an attempt to pit that whole community against one editor - it could just as well be seen as outright canvasing.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 16:54, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

@Le Deluge: You can conclude from the largely aggressive and inapproppriate comment which you got, one out of several posted recently and the general lack of good faith followed with throwing aspirations at the whole community of editors. No amount of detailed analysis would better explain it than the comment posted above just did. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 17:49, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

@Le Deluge: Santasa isn't making bold edits, he's removing paragraphs that have no sources. Wikipedia is not free advocacy hosting space for original research. Editors who want to challenge what he's removing have to do so with bibliography. A discussion about WP:STABLE begins when there are conflicting accounts in bibliography.--Maleschreiber (talk) 19:33, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Not only are those edits bold, not only that edit-warring accompanies them, they are also largely POV pushing based on "common history", which is funny, because, if it is in fact "common history" than it should have a place on the page and not the other way around. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 19:40, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

He's removing paragraphs that have no sources. It's not "bold" - it's the norm in any editing environment which relies on use of bibliography. --Maleschreiber (talk) 19:44, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Exactly. Hardly "bold". More like cleaning up unsourced rubbish. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:11, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Sveti Ilija

I recently disambiguated Sveti Ilija, but the toponymy around Vranje is giving me a bit of pause - apparently there's an unincorporated hamlet (?) of Sveti Ilija located in the hills to the east of the town that should be part of Barelić but may have a post office per Postal codes in Serbia (likewise Google Maps data, which may or may not be reliable), but there's also an eponymous mountain of Sveti Ilija (Serbia) to the west of the town? Can someone find some references to confirm this? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:49, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Joy: Yes, Sveti Ilija is a hamlet of Barelić [6]. Actually, it's kind of its central point, with a school, post office and doctor's office. Here's a local TV reportage from it: [7]. No such user (talk) 19:57, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

OK, so Barelić is a mesna zajednica while Sveti Ilija is a selo, but what has the standard been so far, is each such small selo considered a gazeteer entry worthy of an article, or a redirect? How would we name it, would it be "Sveti Ilija, Barelić" or "Sveti Ilija, Vranje"? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 21:16, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

List of settlements in Serbia follows the census nomenclature about what constitutes a "naseljeno mesto". Having also worked on OpenStreetMap, I'm rather familiar with the situation. For the most part, a "naseljeno mesto" follows the common-sense logic of being an identifiable village with a least semblance of a centre, and a "mesna zajednica" typically coincides with it. However, remote mountainous areas such as this one are usually consist of scattered hamlets, some named and some not, and the whole area then has a name and constitutes a "naseljeno mesto". Quite often, one MZ encompasses several such NM. So it becomes messy...
This one is messy in particular, since it is located on the boundary of Barelić and Viševce [8]. I've rarely seen a settlement boundary outside city suburbs crossing a residential area like that. I suppose it's a relatively recent development, built along the regional road rather than scattered over hills. Whatever the case, it makes it even more sensible to name it "Sveti Ilija, Vranje". No such user (talk) 10:16, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

List of Serbian Revolutionaries

Hello, WikiProject Servia,

I happened upon this article which is just in terrible shape. I'm not a content creator but my superficial judgment is that it needs to be reduced by 75-80% to the most important revolutionaries rather than trying to be comprehensive and list everyone playing a part in revolutionary activities which makes it one long page of red links. But I'm not familiar with the history of Serbia and so I'm hoping someone more knowledgeable about the Balkans can drastically trim this article down to a useful size for our readers.

It also looks like the page is the work of a solitary editor in Windsor, Ontario who might be the same editor as the page creator who was blocked for sockpuppetry. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:42, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Dozens of drafts in need of rescuing

Please see [9]. the contributions of an anon. user. As a frequent reviewer of Articles for creation, they have been frustrating me. Probably at least half of them would be considered notable. in the enWP, if they were properly sourced. Some have no sources at all, some bare links to an ip address without author and title and publisher, some links to sources that enWP would not usually consider reliable.

(There have been similar contributions under other anon. addresses.)

I lack the language abilities to be able to source and fix them. As I encounter them in Drafts listed for deletion, I am postponing deletion for 6 months, but I cannot keep doing this indefinitely. It would greatly help the encyclopedia if some of the members of this wikiproject were to take them in hand. Quite a few have been already deleted--they're mostly listed on the usertalk page as deletion notices. As an admin, I'd be very glad to undelete them if anyone were to work on them. I;'d also be glad to look for additional deleted contributions.

But someone one or more editors have to do the work. Since therfe's so much else I need to be doing, and so many other drafts to work on, by May 1 of this year I shall stop postponing the deletions, unless any of you let me know on my user talk that they have some likelihood to be rescued. DGG ( talk ) 01:59, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Montenegrin or Serbian

I kindly ask you to help me resolve the issue about the language-template usage in this and similar articles. Should I use Montenegrin or Serbian to transcribe the names? Add your comments here. Thank you. --Governor Sheng (talk) 13:34, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

List of Serb countries and regions is being considered for deletion

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Serb countries and regions

Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's deletion discussion page. Feel free to improve the article, but do not remove this notice before the discussion is closed and do not blank the page. For more information, read the guide to deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 17:39, 11 August 2021 (UTC) (talk)

Ivan Alexander of Bulgaria FAR

I have nominated Ivan Alexander of Bulgaria for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Bumbubookworm (talk) 17:04, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Velika Plana

Please consider protection of the Velika Plana article or appropriate disciplinary actions against disruptive editing. It seems someone is trying hard to be 'funny'.--MirkoS18 (talk) 20:11, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Non-Aligned Meeting in Belgrade

I know the weather is quite far from nice today, but if anyone in Belgrade may take and upload to the Commons a photo or two (of the venue, flags etc.) for the 60th Anniversary Additional Commemorative Non-Aligned Meeting article that would be great.--MirkoS18 (talk) 16:04, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Category:Serbian pop-folk singers has been nominated for discussion

Category:Serbian pop-folk singers has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ✗plicit 12:08, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Bizarre albanian nationalist pov

Ocourring insertion of fringe theory in Niš — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.17.21.86 (talk) 03:17, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Michael of Zahumlje GAR

Michael of Zahumlje has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:09, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Stefan Mitrović#Requested move 26 December 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Stefan Mitrović#Requested move 26 December 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 17:20, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Albanian nationalist vandalism on article about Vasojevići

Article about Vasojevići, that id within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, has been vandalized by group of Albanian nationalists who are reverting my updates and adding provocative information such as banner about Albanian tribes or claim that Vasojevići are of Albanian origin. Even though I explained everything on article's talk page, they keep vandalizing the article. I hope that active participants in this project would intervene to stop the vandalism. Same people are vandalizing couple of other articles, so this is not an isolated incident. Tresnjevo (talk) 11:36, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

You should continue the discussion and stop labeling users as "nationalists", you were the one who removed reliably-sourced content without discussing it previously on the talk page. --Vacant0 (talk) 11:50, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Vacant0, if I put sentence that "Earth is very likely flat" and add 10 references for it (many more most certainly exist), is that "reliably-sourced content" for you? It sounds like it is because here we have very similar situation where there was a completely false claim that "Vasojevići are very likely of Albanian origin". I only removed this sentence that is proven to be false by reliable historical data that I added to article (which was later removed by nationalist propagandists).Tresnjevo (talk) 20:11, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Serbs page vandalism

Hello, I just wanted to to give a report on situation that is happening on Serbs article, the editor removed without any explanation a large part of sourced material in the article, providing no reasonable explanation why, especially if we can find the same kind of edits in Bulgarians, Albanians, Italians etc. I have reverted them and of course suddenly that became a problem, I believe this is obvious example of WP:GAMING as you can see here [[10]] and here [[11]], obviously we are now going to have another edit warring with the same editors like before i.e Jingby does not removes those section on Bulgarians page. Theonewithreason (talk) 17:08 19.April 2022 (UTC)