Talk:Milorad Ekmečić

Negative comments from first FAC

The following comments were made regarding the first FAC for this article (see here). I am reproducing them here so that they can be assessed and addressed on the talk page insofar as they can be:

1. There is far too much focus on negative aspects of his career.
2. There is almost zero text regarding why his body of work matters and what he achieved as a scholar during his research, which led to several significant national awards. How can we have a FA without anything of note about "30 good years" of his career?
3. Highly reliable "Vreme" magazine calls Ekmecic "notable representative of Serbian critical school".[1]

   the Vreme obituary is already used in the article, but I somehow missed that initial assessment of him. Added. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:59, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

4. Street is named after him, it's not "proposed". Please do your research.

   This has already been added, with a ref to a Balkan Insight article. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:46, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

5. There is a 272 pages book titled "Pečat Milorada Ekmečića" (Seal/imprint of Milorad Ekmečić) which covers his life and work in great details. It is no used nor even mentioned here.
6. Work by Christian Axboe Nielsen can not be used to give a general overiw of his work. She is more focused on politics in her work and is not a scholar of note. Ekmecic has more citations and greater bibliography. That aside, we need far better and stronger sources in order to present her view in Wiki voice.
7. Ekmečić was buried at the Alley of Distinguished Citizen

   Added, with ref to a Politika article. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:44, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

8. Many of his interesting views about history and geopolitics are not reprsented. In hist interview for Pečat Ekmečić,interview for Pečat a historian and uni. professor for 40 years makes some great observations, claims and notes about history. For example - he claims that there is very little chance for WWIII and explains why. That is just an example, the point is - being adviser for Karadžić is important but his scholary work is far more important.
9. Claiming that he produces "pseudohistory" lacks definitive reliable sources, sorry.
10. According to the Serbian historian Olivera Milosavljević, Ekmečić believed that the Serbian nation "must unite to a higher degree than it is now. The rest of Yugoslavia, which would add Serbian parts from Croatia, as a separate body, is one of the closest solutions" Could you provide the quote in Serbian?
11. Check more on his scholary work here.[2]
12. BU professor writes about his body of works and gives a possitve assesement here.[3]

All in all, very far from Wikipedia's best work and neutral point of view. These comments were made by MareBG.

I plan to work through these points over the next few weeks with a view to improving the article and preparing it for another run at FAC. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:34, 21 May 2023 (UTC)