Talk:Pavle Đurišić

Đurišić was wounded

More than four years ago there was debate on the talkpage about whether Đurišić was wounded or not in October 1944 in Montenegro. Here is the link to that debate: link.

During this debate I presented multiple sources which confirmed that Đurišić was wounded. The other two editors who participated in the debate labeled those sources as nonreliable. A source extensively used in this article (Pajović, Radoje (1977). Kontrarevolucija u Crnoj Gori: Četnički i federalistički pokret, 1941–1945 [The Counter-revolution in Montenegro: The Chetnik and Federalist Movements, 1941–1945] (in Serbo-Croatian). Cetinje, Yugoslavia: Obod. OCLC 5351995.) also confirms that Djurisic was wounded in Montenegro in October 1944.

On the page 515, in connection to Djurisic's meeting with Albanian delegation, Pajovic confirms that Djurisic was wounded. Here is the quote: "На састанку је постигнута начелна сагласност о сарадњи четника и албанских националиста али је потписивање споразума одложено због Ђуришићевог рањавања." [The basic agreement about cooperation of Chetniks and Albanian nationalists was reached but signing was postponed because of the wounding of Djurisic].

Djurisic's wounding is important aspect of this topic.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:53, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Just add it. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:37, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Removed "unresolved" tag, as the only reason it is unresolved is because Antid won't add it. He has access to the source, so he should take responsibility for the edit. Adding an unresolved tag when you could resolve it is disrupting Wikipedia to make a point (what the point is, is beyond me). Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:30, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Rebels in the part of the front which included Đurišić negotiated peace agreement with Italians in mid-August 1941?

According to Milovanović (Milovanović, Nikola B. (1984). Kontrarevolucionarni pokret Draže Mihailovića. Izdavačka radna organizacija "Rad". {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)) rebels on the front which included Đurišić when faced with advancing Italian troops managed to negotiate peace agreement with Italians who accepted some of rebel demands including:

• giving up attempts to establish Montenegro as independent state
• stop torching villages
• retreating Albanian forces

while rebels agreed to:

• allow Italians to re-occupy towns (not villages) captured by rebels during the uprising
• releasing prisoners they took during the uprising

I don't know if there are other sources about this agreement, but if this agreement was indeed concluded, it should be included it into the text of the article to provide important context of activity of Đurišić.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:48, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

You are the one that has the source, so I suggest you add it. I will fix any citation or grammar issues. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:53, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Issue with sourcing: Radoje Pajović

Assertion: The article cites works of Radoje Pajović more than 30 times. Many of the assertions presented in the text of this article rely solely on his works. Having in consideration that Pajović is considered as member of group of Communist party historians who more than any other used his works to promote ideas of the Communist party and struggle against ideas of Chetnik movement. He was also publicly struggling for ideas about autochthonous (non-Serb) Montenegrin ethnicity with autocephalous Montenegrin Orthodox Church, which are also directly opposed to ideas of members or supporters of Chetnik movement. To resolve this issue I propose to replace Pajović with some work authored by neutral uninvolved authors (if it is possible) or to contradict assertions based on Pajović with text based on sources with non-Communist perspective.

Sources:, , ,

References

--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:09, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I strongly oppose this course of action. Pajović is reliable and well cited across the academic literature, and will remain in the article. Serbian sources aren't likely to be neutral as you claim, as they may well be opposed to his ideas about Montenegrin ethnicity and therefore have an axe to grind in criticising his work. I have sought a number of obituaries from Montenegro and elsewhere to compare and contrast with the Serbian news and web sources you have linked, the reliability of which I have yet to look at. Until these have been examined, I suggest you refrain from adding any material from these or attempting to remove Pajović. I remind you that you were TBANed for tendentious editing behaviour on this article in the past, and I will not hesitate to report it if it occurs again. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:38, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Pavle Đurišić is Chetnik from Montenegro, surely historians from Montenegro know much more about him and his actions, and that is why this book has been used so many times. Moving that source from the article makes no sense, in any case there are ways to challenge that source but I think everything is clean. Mikola22 (talk) 11:25, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

• His roots are irrelevant. The author is obviously biased and should be used as little as possible. Author such as the same Communist fanatic and the likes of MD/wanna be historian Cohen are the reasons why Wikipedia as a project has lower quality of articles then it should be, which is supported by some editors who are not able to comprehend this rather obvious fact - no biased authors should be used. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 11:32, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I strongly oppose the extreme POV attempts to discredit a well-respected historian. In international bibliography, he has been assessed as the most prominent Montenegrin historian of this period (Pavlović, Srdja (2008). "Realm of the Black Mountain: A History of Montenegro". Balkanistica. 21: 172.) and esteemed Montenegrin historian (Morrison, Kenneth (2018). Nationalism, Identity and Statehood in Post-Yugoslav Montenegro. Bloomsbury Publishing.) If Sadko and Antidiskriminator don't like the academic assessment and the fact that wikipedia functions according to it, there are other websites which might be more welcome to their approach.--Maleschreiber (talk) 13:51, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Re academic assessment, the sources I presented for my above statements are written by multiple historians including Adžić, Andrijašević and Dimitrijević.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:36, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

You can't remove such an expert from an article. How did you think that this proposal would pass? I thought you and Sadko were joking. Mikola22 (talk) 16:07, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Another Montenegrin historian, Dr Dragutin Papović also heavily criticized Pajović in his PhD thesis as one of the communist party historians (link) who glorified Josip Broz Tito and communist forces. Re to Peacemaker67, the sources I presented are not Serbian news and web sources but exactly more or less obituaries from Montenegro in which Pajović's anti-Serbian and anti-Chetnik activism, both in his real life and his works, is actually openly glorified as something good and normal.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:53, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

No one can stop you from disputing the source, but you know where is the place for that. "Who glorified Josip Broz Tito and communist forces" What he needed, glorify the Ustashas and the Chetniks in order to be an acceptable source? In any case, you know what to do. Mikola22 (talk) 18:09, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, anti-Chetnik/anti-fascist activism is openly accepted and glorified in all countries which celebrate the Victory Day. It definitely is something very good and normal. There are of course websites in which celebration of the anti-fascist victory against Chetnik Nazi collaborators is not considered "something good and normal". Wikipedia is not of those places.--Maleschreiber (talk) 19:18, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Issue with family details 2

Almost 8 years ago I pointed to the fact (link) that A class biography article about 20th century person should contain family details, like family origin, name of the father, mother, son....

Thanks to my initiative the name of his father was added to the article. But at that time I was unable to find source for rest of his family members, except some websites. In the meantime I found additional and reliable source for the rest of his family members: page 41 and 45 of confirms that Pavle had two children, daughter Ljiljana (1937—1943) and son Ilija who was born in 1940, while his mother was Ivana (from Radović family, clan Brnović).--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:03, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Given you found the source and can verify it, you should add it. Given your demonstrated history of using dubious sources, I am not taking responsibility for edits involving sources you have found, because if they are wrong, I would be responsible for the edit, not you. I have told you this many times. Do it yourself, I will fix any grammar and formatting issues. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:11, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

It's not RS. The title says it all but sr:Bojan Dimitrijević is also an interesting read. I think that the sole reason why this particular book is being promoted for these minor details, is the inclusion of this particular author in a FA's bibliography in order to legitimize his later use in other articles.--Maleschreiber (talk) 02:18, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

References