Talk:Nikola Tesla

Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2015

Please change "serbian american inventor" to "croatian american inventor" because he was born and studied in Croatia, although his parents were orthodox. Tesla himself wrote in his diaries that his ancestors were from the croatian cities of Zadar and Novi Vinodol. At least you should add a section talking about his nationality and the quarrel between the croatians and serbs about it. Here are the links that support my thesis: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Tribute_to_King_Alexander from the article of The New York Times published on October 21, 1934 (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9400EFDE1039E33ABC4951DFB667838F629EDE). Thanks. 130.25.70.157 (talk) 17:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. See section above Talk:Nikola Tesla#Serbian American.3F Cannolis (talk) 01:01, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

If the IP actually bothered to read the Tribute to King Alexander, he would easily see how Tesla is praising Serbs. So if a section is to be added, it could well be about the number of Croatians that live in denial that he was a Serb and praised the Serbian King. FkpCascais (talk) 02:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

This argument goes on constantly at every article which mentions Tesla's nationality, and it is endless. Because of the shift in the border there are justifications for both sides. I don't care which nationality he is given, but I think this article should pick one and stick with it. --Chetvorno^TALK 11:37, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that discussion is endless, because there is no definitive answers. First of all, there are no sources that exactly deal with that question. Yes, we have many sources that repeat each other, but is you look at the references you will find that there are none that would back up the writing of that source. I tried to resolve a simpler question, the place of birth, and I was rejected although majority of the sources (that are listed in the article and used to write the article) said that Tesla was born in Croatia. Here we have yet another unclear question about Tesla, and we can not resolve it because there are no sources. The best thing to do is to leave it as it is. Asdisis (talk) 21:17, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

• Consensus for the Serbian American nationality was decided at least 4 years ago... it's long since been chosen. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 12:07, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Exactly. We went trought this, and there are hardly any sources saying he is a Croatian scientist, besides some Croatian sources. The only thing that is sourced regarding Croatia/Croats is that he was born in what is today Croatia. What happends nowadays is that there is some, I dare to say near-hysterical, movement in Croatia in order to Croatisize him. That is why we have all this IPs from Croatia making always the same endless request. And this one is almost outrageous, as the IP seems not to have even bothered to read the Tribute to King Alexander. If any of this IPs wants to make changes, they need to provide a set of reliable sources which would back-up their edit request, because there is vast majority of sources about him being Serbian/Serbian-American. FkpCascais (talk) 13:20, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Tesla is a Croatian scientist because his birthplace is Croatia, or Austrian scientist because he had Austrian citizenship, (although that is another unresolved question, because people after Military zone was returned under Croatian administration were given Croatian citizenship) and of course an American scientist. That does not have anything to do with his ethnicity, but this definition goes towards nationality. Tesla by nationality is not Serbian. I will start a discussion on this topic as soon as i prepare it. The present formulation mixes ethnicity with nationality and it is coined probably on emotions, this time pro-Serbian emotions. One thing is sure, this formulation completely neglects Tesla's former nationality. If he is an American scientist, what had he been before he gained American citizenship and before he arrived to America? I also strongly oppose that any introduction of Croatia in this article is considered to be a nationalistic move as you are trying to present it. Asdisis (talk) 21:38, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

First my IP is from Italy, second I didn't say that you MUST change Serbian to Croatian but I suggested you to create at leat a section in which you talk about this debate, third even the "Treccani" encyclopedia (the most famous and respectful italian encyclopedia) says that Tesla is Croatian. If I really wanted to change that I could do that anyway without asking you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.25.70.157 (talk) 19:42, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

The place to insert this may be Nikola Tesla in popular culture {that article isn't just for comic book references). It could be added here if if IF if there is RS that some kind of controversy exists (the four "if"s added means I did not say go ahead and do it;)). btw, you can't just add it because you saw it in a "source", Wikipedia requires reliable sourcing, not sourcing, very big difference. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 20:39, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

• IP, you couldn't change it "without asking us" because the page is semi-protected. Which means you can't edit it. Also, not seeing what relevance some random Italian encyclopedia has to an English-language site, but there we go. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 21:53, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

The argument about the Treccani encyclopedia has already been used in the Croatian Wikipedia (see here). Even so, Treccani has two articles, one that says that Tesla is "of Croatian origin" (see here) and another one from Enciclopedia Italiana (see here) where they chaned from "origine croata" to "fisico iugoslavo". FkpCascais (talk) 22:02, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Asdisis, to the citizenship issue I started: since then, many wiki pages the fake "Austro-Hungarian" citizenships were removed and the clearance is still ongoing. Since I am mostly active with Hungary related issues, my proposal is to fill the hole between 1867 to 29 July 1891, the fact he resigned on the Austrian citizenship by gathering the U.S. citizenship, the fact there is not known any information he would gain Hungarian - anyway it would have been very problematic to resign on Austrian, gathering Hungarian then after again resign on Hungarian and gathering Austrian, and what for a reason between the 1867-1891 period, it is 99,9999% impossible - I propose to add the infobox the Austrian citizenship between 1867 - 29 July 1891. The were more debates how to demonstrate easily that a citizen of a state is only citizen of one member country inside the state, the two most accepted versions are - check Albert Einstein and Philip Lenard articles i.e. - "Austrian of the Austro-Hungarian Empire (1867 - 29 July 1891)" or "Austrian in Austria-Hungary (1867 – 29 July 1891)". An administrator should choose which is more alike. Anyway the Croatian Military Frontier and it's return to Croatian administration is an interesting issue, since also I was the first who claimed for a Croatian history expert to clarifiy about the status of any possible existence of Croatian citizenship before-after membership in Austrian Empire, or from 1867 in Austria-Hungary, when after a while the old Hungarian-Croatian state relations - administrative, diplomatic, etc. - were reinstated. I found the "Croatian–Hungarian Settlement" article, but I am not sure it would answer our question. Anyway, we Hungarians are sure he was never a Hungarian citizen and we believe his Austrian citizenship was continuous during Austria-Hungary. So we still need a Croatian History expert to clarify the possible Croatian citizenship issue. If he was once, or became a Croatian citizen, would it meant he loose Austrian? Had he to resign or it was automatic? Or by gathering Croatian citizenship, he remained also Austrian meanwhile? (by Hungarian it would be impossible, a law between Austria and Hungary banned dual citizenship). If he was once Croatian citizen, he had to loose it once automatically or resing on it, because before gathering the U.S. citizenship he had to resign only on the allegiance with Austria...well, the most probable is he had continuous Austrian citizenship since the beginning, if he had Croatian, it may be only for a current intervall...but let this to be investigated by Croatians...(KIENGIR (talk) 23:17, 5 May 2015 (UTC))

I remeber your topic, and I had not forgotten it. I will for sure start another topic when I prepare, have objective arguments, and when I will have time. If you remember I posted one answer back then. According to Vasilije Krestic, when Military Zone was reunified with Croatia in 1881. people living there became citizens of Croatia. Here, I have to mention that Vasilije Krestic is, as a greater-Serbian ideologist, completely unreliable source, but it is interesting that he, although he is a greater-Serbian ideologist, stated that. Military zone was Croatian territory under military control and I think that people living there had, by most part, Austrian citizenship. After Military zone was abolished I think that those people automatically gained Croatian citizenship. I'm not sure if Tesla was among them. That is worth investigating, but unfortunately there aren't many documents online, and I'm not a historian to go and investigate. Anyways, wikipedia is not a place where objectivity and rationality wins. That much was documented trough my attempt to change Tesla's birthplace to Croatia when people with no arguments managed to beat my arguments with accusations that I'm Croatian nationalist because I'm trying to introduce Croatia to the article, although I have not stated my nationality and it is only their assumption that I'm Croatian. Regarding citizenship, I agree with you that Tesla most probable had Austrian citizenship, whit a possibility of Croatian citizenship. This is worth investigating. However, regarding this topic, one thing is sure. The formulation American-Serbian scientist if wrong and it completely omits his former nationality and country. However, out of reasons I can only guess, people who gathered around this article are satisfied with this formulation. I found myself how hard it is to be one against the others, even when a great majority of sources(that are even listed on the article page) are on my side. Asdisis (talk) 17:51, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Of course Asdisis, everyone refused your proposals with absolutely no arguments... FkpCascais (talk) 20:58, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Asdisis, yes, I saw I triggered a very long and big debate with my "innocent" warning. I remember your contribution. About Wikipedias objectivity and rationality I met also much arguments and conflicts, I was even twice accused as a sockpuppet just because I could not bare some incorrect or misleading information, of course I was categorized as a Hungarian "nationalist" or whatsoever, but finally rationality and facts won after a while (high level admins noticed the fake charges and banned my last accuser), although it is a very hard work, more stressful if you know you have right but it is much more harder to prove it in a way that would totally comply with the Wikipedia rules. One Romanian friend (Adrian) told me Wikipedia has no connection to the truth, information can be cited by the order of relevance. As you can see on my personal page, assuming good faith should mean from more citable information we put a stress pattern on the most truthful and objective approach. If there are more, the counter-interest will fight you so long it is not against the Wiki rules. Since Serbian-Croatian relations are very tensed, you will face a very hard struggle. About the birthplace, I have to also correct many pages because they forget about Hungary that was a separate state only with a Habsburg/Austrian crown but was never incorporated to the Austrian Empire. About Croatia, I am not such an expert those times when it's personal union and direct affiliation with Hungary was "abolished" because of the Austrian interventions, so I let this issue also to Croatia experts. Yes, we could agree he had a continous Austrian citizenship until emigrating to the U.S., if he had once Croatian, it could be temporary for a certain reason, official Croatian state records should be investigated. Anyway I will fill the hole and add my proposal that holds until something new will not appear. For the debate of the "Serbian-American" designation I can only say, it can be viable if his ethnicity is Serbian. I draw only examples from the Hungarian-American designation, however I meet much conflicts if the designation should refer ethnicity, double citizenship or the former state's designation, where nationality does not necessarily equal with ethnicity. In some non-obvious cases you have to judge individually, there you'll face harsh debates again.(KIENGIR (talk) 21:23, 10 May 2015 (UTC))

Yeah. I will start another debates as soon I have time to prepare them. I'm sorry wikipedia is not completely objective. My sources were dismissed because I had not given an equally strong impression as the rest. The reason is that I was trying to be objective while some people like FkpCascais gave only a strong impression with no arguments or sources (which is not consistent with his strong opposition). I see below some claims and the same pattern is still present in his comments. Strong impression, no arguments, personal interpretations, no sources, strong opposition with no objective reason and so on. Asdisis (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

• After 1918 he had double nationality, American and Yugoslav (Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, K. of Yugoslavia after 1929). What Asdisis is trying to discuss is his nationality prior-1918 (how relevant in general?). I guess having some citizenship it needs to be from a sovereign country, which Croatia at any time during Teslas lifetime was not. FkpCascais (talk) 23:11, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
• Then, there is a wrong assumption Asdinsis is making that Tesla was born in Croatia. Tesla was not born in Croatia, but Tesla was born in the Military Frontier which was a multi-ethnic Crown land of the Austrian Empire. What happened is that the village Tesla was born in, later in 1881 became part of another Austrian crown land, Croatia-Slavonia (he is assuming that it was all always part of some Croatia). This was explained several times to Asdinsis but he seems to have some problems with admitting these straight-forward facts.
• So, similarly we have the case of Vojvodina, like Voivodeship of Serbia and Banat of Temeschwar, which was also a multi-ethnic crown land of Austria. We have notable people born there and we are not assuming they are Serbian just because much of that territory later became part of Serbia. We actually distinguish people born there by their nationality, either Serbian, Hungarian, Romanian, German, Slovak, etc. That is the case with multi-ethnic crown lands of Austrian Empire and later Austro-Hungary. An exact opposite exemple to Tesla would be of Croatian hero Josip Jelačić who was also born in the Military Frontier but in the part which later became part of Serbia. So by Asdinsis logic, Jelačić is Serbian? See the nonsense? FkpCascais (talk) 23:53, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
• What is ridiculously fascinating here is that the proponents of Tesla relation to Croatia are having the Tribute to King Alexander as their main argument, when in fact just by reading and understanding what Tesla wrote, is clear that Tesla is praising the Serbian king against the Croatian attempts of descentralization. I see how can editors non-familiarized with Yugoslav history be mislead, but here is in a few words what the tribute Tesla wrote is all about: Tesla wrote the tribute to New York Times at a time when Kingdom of Yugoslavia was going trough a turmoil. Ever since the creation of Kingdom of Yugoslavia in 1918 that there was a conflict between Serbs who exited WWI victorious and had their territorial compensations given in form of an amplified kingdom (Yugoslavia, perceived by Serbs mostly as enlarged Kingdom of Serbia); and Croats, who initially felt like "liberated" from Austrian rule, but soon felt that the only change for them was that they were now swearing ought to the Serbian king in Belgrade instead of the Austrian emperor in Vienna. So most Croats fought for descentralization and even aspired independence, while most Serbs backed the king and supported a centralized monarchy where Serbs held most, if not all, positions in charge in the kingdom. Croats had their reasons for discontent, started making protests, even uprisings, however the king, Alexander I of Yugoslavia, opted for imposing dictatorship (the 6 January Dictatorship). The result was that discontent grew even stronger among Croatians against Yugoslavia and the king, many openly campaigned worldwide for the Croaatian cause how they were suffering within the Serbian-dominated Yugoslav kingdom (Einstein, for exemple, simpatised with Croatian cause) and it all culminated with the king Alexander assassination while on visit to France, by a group of Croatian and IMRO nationalists. The assassination happened on October 9, 1934, and the tribute Tesla wrote in regard to it, was published in NY Times 10 days later, October 19, 1934. What Tesla is doing in the tribute is praising Serbian tribute and sacrifice for Yugoslavia, backing the king, and by saying he was born in Croatia, in fact he is making a sneaky political game, which is giving the idea to the American public that there were people born in Croatia that supported the king and his policies. Supported the Serbian king, the one who wanted to centralize the country, and who strongly opposed Croatian descentralzation ideals. So it is a bit ridiculous Asdinsis and others opting to have one sentence from the tribute into account, but ignoring the entire meaning of the tribute. FkpCascais (talk) 00:44, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

That is a very interesting claim about dual nationality. You should provide sources and it should be included in the article. Your other "guess" would is wrong. Asdisis (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

No I haven't made an assumption but a claim with over 20 sources. I even went trough every source listed in the article page and concluded that a great majority says that Tesla was born in Croatia. Military zone was not a crown land, and this is the pattern i was talking about. You gave a strong impression based on the fact that is wrong. Military zone was legally Croatian land under military administration, like eastern Croatia was under UN administration for a

few years after Croatian war. In 1881. military administration was abolished. Asdisis (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

No there is nothing similar with your analogy to my case. I claim that Croatia had a part of territory under military administration. I did not claim Tesla was born in Croatia because his village was later included in Croatia-Slavonia. Asdisis (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Tesla himself said he was born in Croatia, however that was not part of my argumentation that was based on sources and literature. We concluded that Tesla's own opinion can not change the historical fact, although I claim that it goes along with historical fact. Your strong opposition to the fact that Tesla was born in Croatia goes even so far that you deny Tesla's own words with this interpretation. Your interpretation above is nothing but your own subjective interpretation. Asdisis (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Either you have some serious understanding problems, or you simply twist everything maximally with no regard to whatsoever. Just be happy and live in denial, but outside this project please. FkpCascais (talk) 06:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I am just interested in making you one simple question: why is then that you think that Tesla wrote a tribute to the Serbian king which was so unpopular among Croats? ;) FkpCascais (talk) 06:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

That has nothing to do with his place of birth. Nor does his own statement that he was born in Croatia. That just shows what Tesla himself felt, but the historical fact remains unchanged regardless of his opinion. I feel that it is pointless to discuss with you since you are obviously subjective. That I concluded upon your claim that Tesla was not born in Croatia because he wrote tribute to Yugoslav king. That is obviously a subjective claim. Asdisis (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I think your answer was much more meant to Asdisis than me, I understand both of your point of view. In case if it would remain blurry, I am also against desginating people's nationality of current status quo, unfortunately we meet often by this regarding Slovak interpretations. I read a horrible - and at the same time very unprofessional and pathetic - debate on Mozart's ethnicity, and finally they let it empty, although it is obvious he was German, but of course the Austrians are afraid of this deisgnation and as well with the confusion with the Third Reich or today's Germany. More funny it is his birthplace that time was not even Austria or Germany, but a smaller German entity. Finally they even cheated history that Austria was never the part of Germany (by territory more time it happened, of course they denied 1938-1945), and every person should be judged by the current status quo, some proposed the ethnicity is not important, but the contemporary nationality...they put horrible examples like Béla Bartók is "Austro-Hungarian" or "Romanian"....I am sorry I did not take the time to intervene, they've made more silly contradictions, just because Austrians have a psychological fear to admit they are ethnic Germans, to say nothing of the Austrian national identity was developed only after WWII. If Mozart would be put as an "ethnic German", it would resolve everything and would not be confused with successor states, but of course if you want to mention a German ethnicity back in time, soon you'll be accused of being a Nazi ideologist...with this story I just wanted to make clear with your second pharagraph I agree. As an accepted Wiki convention, contemporary status quo matters and that's why I did not want to involve the Austrian Empire/Military Frontier/Croatia question, it is not my current expertise. In this case I understand Asdisis, he want's to demonstrate it is de facto/literally Croatia, the historical Croatia, the territory of Croatia, etc. He put's a stress pattern on emphasizing Tesla also supported this by his own words, but unfortunately if that time the crownland's official name did not contain the word "Croatia", then nothing can be done instead of the addendum "modern-day". For us Hungarians it is also painful in some cases the person was born literally in Hungary, the territory of Hungary, but the former/current borders/status quo is/was foreign the time. You mentioned he had double nationality after 1918, how is that possible? Because in modern interpretation, nationality=citizenship, ethnicity can be different but not necessary. We have no informationon that he would be the citizen of Yugoslavia or Kingdom S.C.S....or...?(KIENGIR (talk) 21:47, 11 May 2015 (UTC))

I'm sorry the discussion about Tesla's birthplace went in the wrong way (to the question to whom Military zone belongs ). It should have stayed on the sources. To be completely clear, Tesla was born in Croatian Military Frontier which is not a legal-political entity, but a part of Croatia under military administration (much like eastern Croatia was under UN administration few decades ago). Here you can see on the map. Croatia with it's military frontier, and Slavonia with it's military frontier. [1] Too many people (including me) had gave their opinion on that subject, but no sources were presented. I will gather sources and start a new topic on that question and on the question of Tesla's birthplace. That question remains unresolved and I want to resolve it. Too bad there are no more people willing to help, and I know that there are a lot of people willing to oppose with no arguments like FkpCascais. Also bare the fact that some people opposed to state that Tesla was born in Croatian Military Frontier because it contains the word "Croatian". Regarding citizenship, I support the present formulation, Austrian citizenship until he became American citizen. Asdisis (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

First learn what Military Frontier is. Then think about commenting on an encyclopedia. FkpCascais (talk) 06:03, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

You should learn what Military frontier is since you called it a crown land. That just shows your level of knowledge in that subject. The link you gave clearly says that "The Military Frontier was a separate Habsburg administrative unit". To repeat my claim, Military frontier was a part of Croatia under military administration. You clearly have no knowledge about the topic and although I admit I'm not fully familiar you on the other hand go on and claim obviously incorrect claims with no argument what so ever. In my opinion that just shows you are subjective. I do intend to gather sources and change Tesla's birthplace in this article. Since all the sources I presented weren't enough because the legality of Croatia's territories under military administration remained unclear, I intend to resolve that question. Your unfounded claims will again be disregarded like in the last discussion, about Serbian orthodox church. Asdisis (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

To be concise, he did not belong to the Croatian American community. He was born in the Austrian Empire, in what is today Croatia. His ethnicity is Serb, from Lika (a region which had Serb ethnic majority up until the Croatian War). He was more of an "Habsburg/Austrian Serb" than "Croatian Serb" (nationality-ethnicity origin). To call him "Croatian American" is blatant revisionism – it is already stated that he was born "in the village of Smiljan, Austrian Empire (modern-day Croatia)", which is perfectly sufficient.--Zoupan 06:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Tesla's nationality is still an open question if you haven't read the discussion. If you can be of assistance that would be great. I'm against mixing nationality with ethnicity in the statement that Tesla was a American-Serbian scientist. Not only that, but that neglects whole of Tesla's life before he became an american. The correct formulation in my opinion would be American-Austrian(or Croatian) scientist of Serb ethnicity. Again his nationality before he became American citizen is an open question, but one thing is sure, he either had Austrian or Croatian citizenship before he became American and the present formulation neglects that. I'm interested in the subject and I try to bring objective arguments to the table, but it seems the others are here just to contradict and oppose every good argument with no arguments of their own. Asdisis (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

This discussion has long been over now... Your frustration assdinsis has simply no limits. FkpCascais (talk) 21:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

This discussion FkpCascais is nowhere near over. I supported Asdisis on this topic in a previous discussion given the amount of evidence he presented that Nikola Tesla was born in Croatia. Asdisis, I stumbled upon a Tesla site that mentions The Croatian Military Frontier where Tesla attended high school in Karlovac (Rakovac). This may well be the same Military Frontier in which Tesla was born. Rakovac in the Croatian Military Frontier seems to be written on an official school document, see following link- http://www.croatia.org/crown/articles/10649/1/Nikola-Tesla-distinguished-Croatian-American-inventor-and-his-high-school-education-in-Croatia.html Keep searching.Michael Cambridge 08:40, 21 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Cambridge (talk •contribs)

Here is another link that mentions the Croatian Military Frontier- http://www.croatianhistory.net/etf/tesla.html This one's in Croatian.Michael Cambridge 10:00, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

During the previous discussion I spent a lot of time investigating and I found some great literature on the subject of Military zone in Croatia. I'm sure the answer to the previous discussion is in there, unfortunately I couldn't find that literature online. I intend to go to library and find it when I will have time, since it would resolve the question of Tesla's birthplace once and for all. If someone is willing to help that would be great, but it seems people like FkpCascais are pleased with their version in the article and are willing to oppose any change no matter of objective reasons and sources. Not only that but they are willing to make any ad-hominem attack to discredit that editor. Thank you for the links. Those are great. I often found difficulty to find original Tesla' documents and here on the links there's a bunch. I will save this page and use the documents when I open a new discussion. I already see one correction that needs to be done to the article. Tesla's documents clearly state his mother tongue is Croatian. That has to be changed in the article. I will do the edit, however I know it will be reverted. Fortunately the documents you provided are a great proof. One other thing that documents say is that Tesla's homeland is Croatia. Arguments are slowly accumulating and a new discussion will have to be opened. I'll study those sources in more detail, but I'm already impressed. Great work! Asdisis (talk) 21:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

As FkpCascais said, this discussion has long been over now... we would need far better (WP:RS wise) to revisit this. What we have is more non-reliable sources and the same old nationalistic POVPUSH. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 21:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Excuse me Fountains of Bryn Mawr but if any new evidence comes to light it will be examined thoroughly. There is nothing to fear.Michael Cambridge 10:08, 22 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Cambridge (talk • contribs)

The discussion had not reached any conclusion. If you are claiming that "no consensus for the purposed edit" concluded something then I will use that statement to describe your credibility. Tesla's place of birth is still an open question and I'm trying to resolve it objectively. That is why I haven't started a new discussion and that is why I'm doing the research in my spare time. I agree that it should be based on reliable sources and that is why I'm doing the research. However, I do not agree that sources listed on the article page are not reliable. If that is the case, then the whole article is pretty much useless. Remember that I had gone trough every source listed on the article page and concluded that a great majority say that Tesla was born in Croatia(within Austrain Empire). If you are claiming that I had based my claim on unreliable sources that I must strongly disagree and ask myself the reason why did you not reacted to the whole article which is written from that sources. I also strongly disagree that official Tesla's documents are unreliable sources. If you are claiming that then I can only conclude that you are not objective. Maybe you are talking about the presented pages in general, however the documents are very real and I intend to use them as strong arguments. Of course I won't use some webpage as my source. Asdisis (talk) 22:24, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

• Well, yes, but nothing new has come to light. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:17, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

New evidences had came to light. There is a simple way to determine if the newly presented evidences are new or not. I'm involved in this topic for a long time, and I haven't seen those documents presented yet. I would appreciate if you could point to the topic where those documents had been presented and discussed,since I do not see them in previous discussions. I haven't been involved in this topic from the very beginnings so maybe I missed those sources. If you go trough the discussions I had started you will notice that I had not used that documents nor had anyone else. I admit that maybe I'm mistaken and those are not new evidences. I briefly went trough discussions and maybe I missed them, since I was looking for images. Asdisis (talk) 22:24, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, we caught an interesting circumstance. One of the sources (http://www.croatianhistory.net/etf/tesla.html) present his passport (Putovnicu je Nikoli Tesli izdana u Zagrebu godine 1883., na hrvatskom jeziku, kada je Nikola Tesla imao 27 godina. Odobrila ju je Kraljevska hrvatsko-slavonsko-dalmatinska vlada, vidi gore lijevo). It could be a proof of Croatian citizenship, but to be really sure I want someone to join the discussion from i.e. Wikiproject Croatia, to say nothing of in the Croatian Wikipedia in the citizenship section only Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia, and United States are mentioned. So please cease or confirm my following deduction:

"When the Ausgleich, or Compromise, of 1867 created the Austro-Hungarian Dual Monarchy, the Habsburg crownlands of Croatia and Slavonia were effectively merged and placed under Hungarian jurisdiction."

"Following the Settlement, the Croatian kingdom was referred to using the name Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia."

"Practical territorial consequences of the settlement were creation of Corpus separatum attached to the Kingdom of Hungary (pursuant to the article 66) and incorporation of the Croatian Military Frontier and the Slavonian Military Frontier in the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia (pursuant to articles 65 and 66) in 1881."

"With this compromise the parliament of personal union (in which Croatia-Slavonia had only twenty-nine deputies) controlled the military, the financial system, legislation and administration, Sea Law, Commercial Law, the law of Bills of Exchange and Mining Law, and generally matters of commerce, customs, telegraphs, Post Office, railways, harbors, shipping, and those roads and rivers which jointly concern Hungary and Croatia-Slavonia."

"The Compromise confirmed Croatia-Slavonia's historic, eight-centuries-old relationship with Hungary and perpetuated the division of the Croat lands, for both Dalmatia and Istria remained under Austrian administration.[15]"

The passport is from 1883. It is in two languages, Croatian and German, on the behalf of Franz Joseph, including his titles (C. Austria, K. Hungary, Dalmatia, Croatia-Slavonia). The Croatian text above states it is approved by the Croatian-Slavonian government. In 1883, under Hungarian personal union it is very highly assumed this is not supporting necessarily an Austrian citizenhsip, can it be possible after 1867/1881 the Croatian-Slavonian Government had the right to give or introduce citizenship? As we see above, Austrian administration of the these territories have been ceased. I don't say he ever lost Austrian citizenship, since someone sourced earlier he resigned on the allegiance from Austria before gathering the U.S. citizenship. So the infobox is still valid, who knows maybe Austrian or Croatian citizenship was not mutually excluded like Austrian/Hungarian. So if anytime Croatian citizenship were held, we should know the due date, only then it could be added next to the existing ones. But I really finished investigating, I even went more far as I expected. Someone should make this clear from Croatian side.(KIENGIR (talk) 14:15, 24 May 2015 (UTC))

He had Austrian citizenship. The thing is that his passport was issued in Zagreb, the capital of the crown land of Croatia-Slavonia. The issue of including Croatian language is not that meaningfull. I am not sure if you have any Austro-Hungarian bills, but you could see that 8 languages are used on it. The document translated reads,

"The government of Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia - in the name of his majesty Franz Joseph I, Austrian emperor (cesar) and Hungarian, Croatian, Slavonian and Dalmatian king, Passport".

So the document only shows that the Zagreb could issue passports on behalve of the Austrian Empire. Not independently, of course. FkpCascais (talk) 14:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

As I said, people in Military zone gained Croatian citizenship after 1881. This of course is not supported by sources, but I read that in various places, and I think it is correct. The fact that Tesla had his passport issued by Croatia is a strong indicator that he had also gained Croatian citizenship with the unification, although not the definitive proof by itself. Your other questions are interesting, and there is a lot of literature about Military zone and Croatia in that time. The answer to that questions is in there. It would be great is someone could find that literature online. However, I'm involved in the question of Tesla's birthplace and I intend to study that literature. Unfortunately I don't really have much time, so I don't know when I will do that. Regarding Tesla resigning Austrian citizenship, I believe it is more complicated. I think that in foreign relations Austrian or Hungarian citizenship was stated. I'm very sure that you are right by saying that Austrian or Croatian citizenship were not mutually excluded like Austrian/Hungarian. This is worth investigating. I'm interested in this topic and I will keep investigating for new sources. Asdisis (talk) 19:18, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

If FkpCascais has right, somebody should explain me why would be needed the behalf or mediation of the Austrian Empire, when Croatia-Slavonia were reassigned to personal union to Hungary, and Austrian administration were ceased (it remained only in Dalmatia and Istria). That's why I cited much above from the Croatian-Hungarian settlement, and the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia article, because almost we need a good lawyer to decide what the laws were that time :) It is also dubious for me, why the "Government of Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia" used, if the separation were made earlier in 1881, in 1883 it should be only "Government of Croatia-Slavonia" only. I have access to Hungarian Military papers, their language was German-Hungarian, more dominantly German if it was issued in Austrian territory or by the Imperial High Command. About the right, "issuing a passport independently" is a little bit contradicting with the Croatian-Hungarian deal that Croatia has it's own separate administration without Hungarian involvement. Franz Joseph was everyone's King, King for Austria, Hungary, etc., so the fact his behalf is written, it does not necessarily proves an exclusive Austrian citizenship or right, but really, I can't believe nobody knows it for sure from Croatian side....(KIENGIR (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2015 (UTC))

It is possible that Tesla had Austrian citizenship since at time of his birth Military Frontier was under direct rule from Vienna. I also noticed the inconsistency regarding the Croatia-Slavoinia and Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia issue. Another thing I want to mention is that Asdinsis still doent understand what Military Frontier is and that the part later was added to Croatia was part of the Military Frontier. PS: I haven't found sources yet for his Yugoslav citizenship but I didn't really had time for it. Asdinsis only goal here is to say Tesla was Croatian, he has been doing that for 2 years now, all he finds are Croatian sources, so that is why I don't take him too seriously. Regards KIENGIR, FkpCascais (talk) 21:09, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I had not used more than a few Croatian sources out of two dozens or more. Also, the statement that you would find a source not credible solely on the fact that it is Croatian is enough for me to show you are subjective. Asdisis (talk) 00:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

It is not that Asdisis :( now I see how you misinterpreted me. The thing is that I have participated in a large number of hot debates in Yugoslav-related matters for many years here on en.wiki, and whenever that hapends it is quite usual that participants demand foreign neutral sources. For instance, that happened with many discussions regarding WWII in Yugoslavia, where we avoided using local Yugoslav authors because of their possible bias, and we preferably used foreign ones. And sorry to tell you, but I think we should apply this to Tesla as well, cause seems quite obvious that Croatian sources will be treating him as Croatian, and Serbian ones as Serbian. See my point? It was not because I don't like Croatia -_- you misunderstood me about this. FkpCascais (talk) 02:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I had not used but a few Croatian sources in the previous discussions and I think you know that very well. Not that there's anything wrong with that. You are still on the imagined discussion whether Tesla is Croatian or Serbian. I had not participated in such discussion. I had not questioned Tesla's ethnicity, although I might touch that topic since I haven't seen many arguments to any definite answer. However, one thing at a time. I tried to resolve the question of Tesla's birthplace, and I intend to do that, since it is still an open question. For now my interest is on his citizenship since noone but KIENGIR had tried to resolve that question, noone tried to help, and I don't expect you will participate the discussion I opened in a good faith. But when it came to the question of introducing Croatia, or even Croatian Military Zone to the article everyone objected with absolutely no arguments, including you. You had opposed the most, and you had not presented a single valid argument, not a single source to back up your claims and personal interpretations. I can only conclude that you are subjective. Also you said everything about you with the last statement about Croatian sources, and now you just confirmed contempt towards Croatian and Serbian sources because there is a possibility that they are biased. A possibility. That is a clear bias on your part. I have not misunderstood anything. A person who objects to several dozen sources with no valid argument , with no presented sources and only with his personal interpretations is subjective. You clearly have a contempt towards Croatia. However, as I said, that is not important, because you anyways won't present any source, and we know what wikipedia says about unfounded claims and personal interpretations. Asdisis (talk) 21:07, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I presented you plenty of sources saying Tesla was born in Military Frontier, Austria. That is a fact you have some problems understanding but that is not my problem. Second issue, Tesla didn't had Croatian citizenship because Croatia was never independent nation during Teslas lifetime, deal with it. And you presented tones of croatianhistory.com, Croatia.com Croatia this and that sources which have zero value, so stop annoying all people around here. Also, stop talking about others, because the only one here who failed to present evidence is you. FkpCascais (talk) 06:15, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

I presented several dozen sources that Tesla was born in Croatian Military Frontier, that was not the dispute. About the citizenship, join the below discussion and present your sources. I started by presenting some, and I'm currently studying other sources. The premise that Croatia should be independent so that people living there could have Croatian citizenship is wrong. First of all that is contrary to all of the currently presented sources and it is contrary to common sense. Neither Hungary nor Austria were independent and both Hungarian and Austrain citizenship existed. Please read the sources I presented so we omit such pointless claims in the future. I do not know which sources you are referring that have zero value. I think you are referring to the sources that weren't presented by me. Again this is the statement that describes your credibility. You haven't presented a single source and by default you reject other sources. I'm sorry, but that is subjective. You claim that I misunderstood your subjective statement that all Croatian and Serbian sources have zero value, and from comment to comment you repeat that statement and with your acts prove that. I do not intend to have such pointless discussions with you in the below discussion. Walls of text do not help anyone, so you either present the sources or restrain yourself from making personal unfounded claims and interpretations. Asdisis (talk) 11:57, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

FkpCascais makes unfounded claims. I don't think he's participating with good intentions, so I do not take his claims seriously. At the end, it isn't important what he says because he never verifies his claims with sources. I don't think he will contribute to this discussion. To get back to the topic. It is normal that every entity in Austrian Empire issued passport in the name of the emperor. That does not help us with anything. On the passport you can clearly see formal-legal crown lands of the Austro-Hungary, Austria, Hungary and Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia. Kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia and Dalmatia was the official name and I really do not know why wikipedia states only Croatia-Slavonia in the article you are talking about. You have to know that wikipedia isn't always the most correct source and I suggest you find better, history literature if you want to know more on that topic. The only thing we can conclude using Tesla's passport on the question of his citizenship is that there is a strong indication that he may had Croatian citizenship since his passport was issued in Zagreb. That is due the fact that people living in Military zone became Croatian citizens after 1881. I don't see how Tesla would be skipped in that process, especially when he had interaction with formal institutions. I don't really know how the process went nor if there is a document stating someone's nationality (most certainly there is). Apart from history literature I tried to find official documents. If you want to investigate I suggest you go in that direction. Tesla had to write down his nationality in several places, so it would be interesting to see what he stated by himself. I don't think there's much we can do with history literature, because it will say in general that people in Military zone became citizens of Croatia after 1881, but nothing about Tesla specific. The people like FkpCascais will most certainly oppose to anything that is even supported with several dozen sources, let alone the source that does not talk about Tesla by name. There aren't those problems with his place of birth, but about his nationality there are, since it changed in 1881. My suggestion is to concentrate on his immigration records, which I could not find, or census records. Also you said Tesla resigned Austrain citizenship, you are probably referring to this [2]. It would be gread if that slip could be found on some formal site, like [3] or [4] just to verify it. Bdw, ancestry.com has Tesla's naturalization record, but you have to pay to see it. Lastly I have to say that almost none of the literature about Tesla does not deal with the questions about his nationality, ethnicity, place of birth, and so on. If you look at the literature you won't find any footnote. As someone said, one books in many times just repeats the previous one and so on. The real documents are hard to find. I haven't really seen that many documents, and to me even the question of Tesla's ethnicity is still an open question, although I have no intention to deny it, yet. I would start an awful discussion and I wouldn't want to get into it without any sources. Asdisis (talk) 17:33, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

• • The Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia never existed. It was just never fulfilled wish of some Croatian nationalists. British Historian Taylor, while writing about the Habsburg Dynasty, stated clearly that Dalmatia never had a representative in the so-called Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia, rather opted to have representatives in the Imperial and Royal Court at Vienna only.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 17:58, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

We can clearly see "Kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia, Dalmatia" written on Tesla's passport. Your interpretation of valid source is false. Either present the source or restrain yourself from personal interpretations. Asdisis (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:04, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Anyone can give their interpretation. Let's try to avoid personal attacks, Asdisis. --Chetvorno^TALK 20:50, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, Asdisis, FkpCascais, I react this section for the new debate of yours. I highly oppose to disregard a source, because it is - let's say Chilean or Scottish (this we agreed with Adrian, a Romanian user we had very hard clashes, but finally we noticed our struggle for the truthful, valid content, so any discussion or debate should not be a Hungarian-Romanian "war"). I say this, because in many spicy historcial debates our "counterparts" say "it is just a Hungarian source", and they don't put any validity or credibility, and it hurt us very much because this does not mean it cannot be true. I am much amazed when they expect Anglo-Saxon sources in the 12th century, if it would have any real decisive manner. I.e. who else could have a more valid administration, that Hungarian Royal documents that time? Because they are Hungarian, they are surely not to be taken serious (i.e. debate between Romanian presence in Trasylvania)? I cannot bet if Hungarian-Romanian or Croatian-Serbian relations are more tensed, but the latter one is more fresh and spicy, we with Romanians get used to it almost a century. Well, when I corrected some mistakes in WWII Yugoslavia-related articles, I was heavily attacked by Serbians, finally an American editor made "peace", I was not totally satisfied, but the result was more objectivity in the article afterwards. My policy is to judge and value every source, but those to be taken more serious containing evidence, not just a point of view, and then I don't care the source's "nationality". Ignoring a source because of this is a clear mistake. About being "independent", Austria and Hungary in a way after 1867, and practically for sure after 1881 Croatia-Slavonia-(Dalmatia?) were independent, having their own country, administration and authority with citizenship (Austria, Hungary), but outside to the outer world they appeared as a joint country with some joint ministries of external affairs. Croatia-Slavonia became and independent country, administration, (citizenship? to be resolved) with a personal union with Hungary, like in the old times. Also, viewed from outside, they see only Austria-Hungary and they question the independency as a fully sovereign state, but legally they were independent, the only things is the countries had other ties with each other as per agreement, de facto it is shortening the concept of "total independence" (Hungarian-Croatian deals first level, Austrian-Hungarian deals second level, Austro-Hungarian deals with the outer world as final level). Regards(KIENGIR (talk) 22:14, 30 May 2015 (UTC))

Tesla entered USA with Austrian citizenship. FkpCascais (talk) 00:55, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

This is a good example why wikipedia does not use primary souruces. To foreign states all citizens of Austro-Hungarian empire had Austrian citizenship. The discussion is about citizenship within Austro-Hungary, and not how it was viewed by USA or other foreign states. I confirmed this with a secondary source in the below RfC. Asdisis (talk) 13:10, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2015

In the Early years section, last paragraph, the name "Ferenc Puskas" is probably wrong. The correct name is likely to be "Tivadar Puskas". (Ferenc was a well-known football player in the 1950's, Tivadar was the inventor of the telephone exchange in the 1880's.) 80.98.154.22 (talk) 21:58, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern. I checked the facts, and apparently Tivadar Puskas set up a telephone exchange along with his brother, Ferenc (different person of no relation to the 1950s footballer), so the article is correct. Altamel (talk) 22:40, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

References

edit request

The disambiguation page linked to should be Nikola Tesla (disambiguation), and not Tesla (disambiguation)

A plain {{otheruses}} will link to it.

Or if linking to both is desired

{{otheruses|Nikola Tesla (disambiguation)|Tesla (disambiguation)}}

For other uses, see Nikola Tesla (disambiguation) and Tesla (disambiguation).

But in either case, the primary linked disambiguation page should be "Nikola Tesla (disambiguation)", since that is the name of this page, "Nikola Tesla", which is not "Tesla"

-- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 01:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Seems reasonable. Done Altamel (talk) 06:37, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Tesla's citizenship from 1867 to 1891

I've done some research on this question, and after long time I think it is time to resolve it. KIENGIR had asked for help a long time ago, and no one had interest to help, but when it came to the question of Tesla's birthplace everyone were experts. My conclusion is the following. After 1868 and Croatian-Hungarian settlement two forms of citizenships existed in the lands of Hungarian crown.

To quote: "National Citizenship

According to the Croatian-Hungarian Compromise, the legislation on acquisition and loss of citizenship was common for all the lands of the Hungarian Crown while their execution was decentralized so the Croatian-Slavonian Ban had full executive powers in the matters of national citizenship."

"Local Citizenship and Croatian-Slavonian Membership

Croatia-Slavonia had full autonomy in the matters of local citizenship ( zavičajnost ). In other words, its legislative body had full power to enact the law on local citizenship, and the Ban with the autonomous Government had full authority in the execution of the laws on local citizenship."

[5]

The national citizenship is called Hungarian in Hungary and Croatian-Hungarian in Croatia-Slavonia.

I have more sources, but I still need to go trough them. For now I think this is enough to start the discussion. The matter to discuss is what to write under Tesla's citizenship, national or/and local citizenship. My suggestion that both national and local citizenship should be stated.

So the formulation would be: Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship with local citizenship of Croatia-Slavonia.

Local citizenship was primary when it came to determine important rights. More about that in the presented source.

"The law on the Croatian Domicile(Heimatrecht)...was the first law that regulated the question of belonging to Croatian local communities in a systematic and rather complete manner...it was the basis for exercising particular civil and political rights derived from the Croatian autonomy which had been defined by Croatian-Hungarian Compromise...of which the most important were electoral and the right to hold posts in public service" [6] (go down to summary). Asdisis (talk) 20:11, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

KIENGIR I hope to see you in this discussion. Also I think it would be the best to revert your edit until this discussion is finished. I agreed with you that Austrian citizenship should be stated, and it is interesting how noone objects until something Croatian is introduced. Then a bunch of people object. I hope we can resolve this question objectively. I will make a RfC. Asdisis (talk) 00:05, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 May 2015

Please add Croatian (before or after Serbian) inventor, because he was partly Croatian. We all know his quote "Ponosim se srpskim rodom i hrvatskom domovinom" translated to English "I am proud with my Serbian origin (culture) and my Croatian homeland (country)" . Also he never lived in Serbia, He grow up in Croatia and later went to America. Regards, Source: https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datoteka:Telegram_Tesla_Macek_0108.JPG https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedija:Nacionalno_pripisivanje Korisnik 1112 (talk) 13:56, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

•  Not done - Perennial request that consensus has always rejected. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:24, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

• I just want to mention that the scientist formulation should change when the discussion about Tesla's nationality is resolved. Tesla was Croatian-Hungarian citizen of Croatian-Slavonian local citizenship. Which of these two should be included in the discussed formulation should be decided. I invite everyone to take part in the above discussion. Asdisis (talk) 22:47, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
• There was no Croatian-Hungarian citizenship ever. Tesla was born in the Militärgrenz, an Austrian Empire province, therefore, he was, by his birth time and place, a citizen of the Austrian Empire. Later, after 1867., it is possible to talk only about Austro-Hungarian citizenship. Learn more from: Utjesenovich-Ostrozinski, O.M. Die Militärgrenz-Frage und der osterreichisch- ungarische constitutionalismus / O.M. Utjesenovich-Ostrozinski .— 2. Aufl. — : Geitler, 1869 .— Lang: ger --72.66.12.17 (talk) 02:38, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Please join the above discussion and present your sources. I'm sorry but I can't read sources on German. One thing is sure, there was no Austro-Hungarian citizenship and you are the first one who claims that there is, so you should definitely present sources. I'm not against sources on other languages, but if you intend to use them, it would be helpful if you could quote the concrete statement, like I did in the above discussion.Asdisis (talk) 11:41, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

• • When I wrote 'Austro-Hungarian citizenship' I meant Austrian or Hungarian citizenship. No need for any discussion. All attempts to croatize Tesla shall be rejected without any discussion. Certainly, Tesla was not Croatian-Hungarian citizen of Croatian-Slavonian local citizenship, for such citizenship never existed. Tesla's patent files, his US immigration records are showing that Tesla was an Austrian Empire citizen.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 17:46, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Please join the above discussion with your sources. Asdisis (talk) 18:32, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

• The 'quote' "Ponosim se srpskim rodom i hrvatskom domovinom" is a forgery coming into political propaganda after the Macek's death. Macek never ever mentioned any telegram sent to or received from Tesla.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 02:43, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

I personally haven't seen and secondary sources that claim that. You should back up your claim with secondary sources. Anyways, Tesla himself said that he was born in Croatia in the letter he himself sent to New York Times. One thing is sure, Tesla thought of himself as a Serb, and thought that Croatia was his homeland. About the statement, it can be a forgery, but other Tesla's statements confirm that he thought that way, regardless of this statement. Asdisis (talk) 11:41, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

• • Please, stop annoying us with nonsense. (I'm just repeating a claim written earlier.)--72.66.12.17 (talk) 17:50, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Just be very careful with your statements, regardless of your explanation, "Austro-Hungarian citizenship" not ever can be meant Austrian or Hungarian, since it is a common mistake by mostly the Anglo-Saxons. If you call something Austro-Hungarian, it is meant on the joint institutions or the Monarchy itself. So, pay high attention to the terminology, always use in similar case "Austrian or Hungarian", but never "Austro-Hungarian", it will be of course mistaken. If you have any source Croatian citizenship not existed for sure, please present it, the issue is still not resolved.(KIENGIR (talk) 22:29, 30 May 2015 (UTC))

• @KIENGIR: No matter what you wrote above, a non-existent notion (Croatian citizenship) does not need any source to be proven non-existent.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 02:30, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Of course it matters, be precise or do nothing. You consider it non-existent, I read all arguments pro and contra, it is still not totally clear. Soon we should ask really a Croatia Government Official (KIENGIR (talk) 23:01, 31 May 2015 (UTC))

Company link

please change ((Tesla (company)|Tesla)) to ((Tesla (Czechoslovak company)|Tesla))

•  Done Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:28, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Tesla's citizenship from 1867 to 1891

Tesla's citizenship from 1867 to 1891 is an unresolved question. Should it be stated as Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship with local citizenship of Croatia-Slavonia. Also, should Croatian-Slavonian local citizenship from 1861 to 1867 be stated.

The purposed change is:

Citizenship:

• Austrian national citizenship (1856 – 1867), Croatian-Slavnonian local citizenship (1861 - 1867)

• Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship , Croatian - Slavonian local citizenship (1867 - 1891)

• United States (30 July 1891 – 7 January 1943)

Note: this discussion is regarding Tesla's citizenship within Austrian-Empire and Austro-Hungary, not as that citizenship was viewed by United States or some other foreign country.

Asdisis (talk) 00:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

• Summoned by bot I would need to see factual proof regarding to any one of those proposed changes you had in mind. For now, I abstain from making a decision until facts are shown. Nick2crosby (talk) 00:37, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

General discussion regarding citizenship question in Austrian Empire and Austro-Hungary

This section should produce general conclusions about citizenship question within Austrain Empire and Austro-Hungary, that apply for groups of people. For instance "all people living in Austrian Empire up to 1867 have a common Austrain citizenship" , or the suggested claim "all people in the lands of Hungarian crown from 1867 have common citizenship called Hungarian in Hungary and Croatian-Hungarian outside Hungary".

I've done some research on this question, and after long time I think it is time to resolve it. KIENGIR had asked for help a long time ago, and no one had interest to help, but when it came to the question of Tesla's birthplace everyone were experts. My conclusion is the following. After 1868 and Croatian-Hungarian settlement two forms of citizenships existed in the lands of Hungarian crown.

To quote: "National Citizenship

According to the Croatian-Hungarian Compromise, the legislation on acquisition and loss of citizenship was common for all the lands of the Hungarian Crown while their execution was decentralized so the Croatian-Slavonian Ban had full executive powers in the matters of national citizenship."

"Local Citizenship and Croatian-Slavonian Membership

Croatia-Slavonia had full autonomy in the matters of local citizenship ( zavičajnost ). In other words, its legislative body had full power to enact the law on local citizenship, and the Ban with the autonomous Government had full authority in the execution of the laws on local citizenship."

[7]

The national citizenship is called Hungarian in Hungary and Croatian-Hungarian in Croatia-Slavonia.

I have more sources, but I still need to go trough them. For now I think this is enough to start the discussion. The matter to discuss is what to write under Tesla's citizenship, national or/and local citizenship. My suggestion that both national and local citizenship should be stated.

So the formulation would be: Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship with local citizenship of Croatia-Slavonia.

Local citizenship was primary when it came to determine important rights. More about that in the presented source.

"The law on the Croatian Domicile(Heimatrecht)...was the first law that regulated the question of belonging to Croatian local communities in a systematic and rather complete manner...it was the basis for exercising particular civil and political rights derived from the Croatian autonomy which had been defined by Croatian-Hungarian Compromise...of which the most important were electoral and the right to hold posts in public service" [8] (go down to summary).Asdisis (talk) 00:14, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

• Reject the proposal I do not think that this question/request makes sense at all. The phrase "national and local citizenship" is just laughable. Spam and trolling "supported" by a blog and a private publication--72.66.12.17 (talk) 02:26, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

That's not a valid argument. Maybe it is laughable to you, but that's what the sources tell. You are free to present your sources. Asdisis (talk) 13:03, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Here are some more sources. This time they are not on English but FkpCascais can confirm the translation is correct.

• "With the establishment of the dual monarchy apart from Austrian, a Hungarian citizenship was constituted for all the lands of Hungarian crown. This citizenship in Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia was in practice called Croatian-Hungarian. Apart from Croatian-Hungarian [called National citizenship in English source] citizenship very important was the local citizenship of Croatian-Slavonia which as earlier was based on belonging to a certain Croatian-Slavonian municipality. Croatian-Hungarian agreement stated that legislation will be mutual and that executive authority will belong to Croatian-Slavnoia separate and Hungary separate." (page 713, 714) [Naturalization in Croatia and Slavonia from 1848 to 1918 , hrcak.srce.hr/file/176422]

The last sentence is important to understand why the same citizenship was called Hungarian in Hungary and Croatian-Hungarian in Croatia-Slavonia.

"The costitution [1849.] determined one common national citizenship for whole empire and the local citizenship was renounced"[Naturalization in Croatia and Slavonia from 1848 to 1918 , hrcak.srce.hr/file/176422]

• "...from the time of the dismissal of Sabor in 1861. to the Croatian-Hungarian settlement in the state law a tentative state according to which in Croatia-Slavonia an Austrian national citizenship and Croatian-Slavonian local citizenshop was in force " (page 711)[Naturalization in Croatia and Slavonia from 1848 to 1918 , hrcak.srce.hr/file/176422]

In this way I actually need to correct myself. Local citizenship existed from 1861. Therefor I add this to my request for edit. I apologize for my mistake. I started the discussion without fully investigating the sources, because I expect KIENGIR to help, since he is the one that started the discussion about Tesla's citizenship some time ago. The paper i referenced when I started RfC was called "Hungarians and Citizenship in Croatia-Slavonia 1868-1918", and it did not deal to events prior to 1868.

Also I have resolved the question of Tesla resigning on Austrian citizenship in USA. Not only that but much more.

• To quote: "...Austro-Hungary in international relations appeared as a single political subject...and that according to foreign states, all members of Austro-Hungarian empire were held as a single political nation and the territory of the empire as united in a single political subject so a single Austro-Hungarian citizenship existed [to foreign states] ... so the 1. Austrain state constitutive law from 21st December of 1867 stated that ...for all for all citizens of kingdoms and lands present in the empire state council there exist a common Austrian citizenship " (page 798)[9]

This source confirms what we thought earlier. All people from Austro-Hungarian empire appeared to foreign stated as Austrain citizens. That unfortunately means that in all foreign documents Tesla will appear as Austrian citizen so we can't conclude anything from them about Tesla's citizenship within Austro-Hungarian empire. Asdisis (talk) 13:03, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

But Asdinsis, we have the following problems. First is that, as you say, the A-H citizens to foreign world would appear as Austrian citizens, but that is what ends up being what matters. Second, you are providing sources about studies done in the Zagreb university (not really scholarly published sources) about citizenship during A-H period, and none talks about Tesla. So we cannot guess what Tesla nationality had based on any of this. And third, and maybe most important, we know what your final intention here is, which is to say Tesla was Croatian, and we have seen you trying to get there through various ways, and still, even if you got a case here, which you don't because none of this is directly sourced for Tesla, it want get you where you want. FkpCascais (talk) 14:26, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I do not say that A-H citizens to foreign world would appear as Austrian citizens, but the presented source. I opened a discussion about Tesla's citizenship within Austro-Hungary. I shall state that clearly on the top. The view USA or some other country had on that matter does not matter. Special rights were gained by both national and local citizenship in Austro-Hungary, and that is what's important, the right's determined from them. The sources I presented are scholarly published sources, you can clearly see ISSN numbers stated. We do not guess Tesla's citizenship upon this. If you read the sources you could have seen that special principles applied when citizenship was determined. Citizenship was not determined for each person individually, but special principles applied, and it was presumed. I already answered you on this question, and I had quoted the article and directed you to further read the source. I shall repeat what the sources tell "As in all other citizenship laws, the fundamental principle for the acquisition of citizenship was the principle of ius sanguinis.". This is not in any way guessing as you are trying to present it. Anyways I should also state here that you took my statement from earlier from my answer to KIENGIR:

" I don't think there's much we can do with history literature, because it will say in general that people in Military zone became citizens of Croatia after 1881, but nothing about Tesla specific. "

After studying source I found that statement to be false. Citizenship laws were applied on determined principles, and not for every person individually. The sources I presented speak extensively on that question and I shall include quotations to disprove your claim.

The final intention is to determine Tesla's citizenship objectively. I strongly oppose that introducing the word "Croatian" is something wrong as you are trying to present it. That is a subjective claim. I agreed Tesla's citizenship was to be stated as Austrian, and that edit was introduced in the article. You had no objections then although the same "problems" you spoke off appeared back then as well. Neither back the no documents relating to Tesla were presented either, and you had no objections. Now you have strong objections when I studied the sources and when I'm purposing to introduce the change which includes the word "Croatian". That shows how subjective you are. Asdisis (talk) 15:03, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

New source that deals with Tesla specifically: "Nikola Tesla- Croatian origin". The source is Italian encyclopedia. http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/nikola-tesla/

I intend to study Croatian sources because I think those sources deal with the question of Tesla's citizenship more extensively. Unfortunately there aren't many sources available online. However I will try to find them. I studied almost all the sources I studied before and many of them do not speak of the question of this topic. Some mention the fact upon which we all agree, that Tesla was a subject of the Austrian emperor. Best regards. I hope I will have some help this time in the research. I can't carry this whole discussion especially when people like some people here are not discussing in good faith, but interfere to the point of misconduct. Asdisis (talk) 18:44, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I would also like to include this source. According to MrX, published articles are valid sources. I had an extensive argument with him about the source included in the article stated under number 3, BBC's article. It turned out it is a valid source.

http://www.neurope.eu/article/get-know-croatia-28th-member-european-union/

The article stated Tesla as a famous Croat. I also note that this source has to be taken in the context of the previously presented sources which state the general claim. This source as, the previous one, specifies the claim to Tesla. That's the second source that specifies the general claim to Tesla. I know subjective people will object but the general claim by itself is enough to conclude that Tesla had mentioned citizenship. However since wikipedia has its own rules I provided the sources that specify the claim to Tesla. Asdisis (talk) 21:02, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Outsiders view

I have been watching this page for a good while now and have seen the point of his citizenship be argued here several times. May I suggest that Wikipedia is not the place to answer questions that are not clearly answerable? If the sources contradict each other then represent each of them according to their weight. If the sources don't give a clear answer then don't say it. What we certainly should not do is figure it out for ourselves.

If there is no clear answer in the sources then we should document what is in the sources and leave it at that. Chillum 15:34, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree. However if all presented sources tell that all people in the lands of Hungarian crown have a common citizenship called Croatian-Hungarian outside Hungary, then I think there is only one clear answer. This is the base claim to be determined at this point. I will open a separate section dealing with that question so the discussion is not clogged.Asdisis (talk) 16:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Sections that deal with the question of original research

Please write under this sections regarding the claims that original research was done. So the above discussion about the general question about citizenship is not clogged. I strongly suggest we firstly make conclusions on the upper sections since only then we can determine if original research have been done, or if it is reasonable to draw a conclusion about Tesla from the upper sources.

I will copy all of the above discussion about that question here.

Is there anything related actually to Tesla here? FkpCascais (talk) 00:50, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

First of all, I think it is sad that you all have ignored the discussion until I opened a RfC, although I invited you several times to join the discussion because you stated that you oppose my suggestion. You tried to ignore the previous discussion and revert any change I make with the explanation that I'm making changes without consensus. Thus I do not think you are participating in good faith.

Now to answer your question. Yes, all this is related to Tesla. Citizenship was presumed. For instance local citizenship was gained by birth, marriage..etc. Also, read the presented sources which explain principles upon which citizenship is granted. To quote from the above source: "As in all other citizenship laws, the fundamental principle for the acquisition of citizenship was the principle of ius sanguinis." Asdisis (talk) 13:06, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

• Reject Your personal interpretations amount to ORIGINAL RESEARCH, Asdisis, and don't add anything to previous arguments. It's time to let it go. --Chetvorno^TALK 14:17, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Where do you see original research? I quoted only secondary sources. Asdisis (talk) 15:03, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

You don't have any source saying Tesla had Croatian-Slavonian citizenship, that is why all this is useless. FkpCascais (talk) 15:16, 31 May 2015 (UTC) 15:16, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

That's right. Asdisis, editors are not allowed to draw conclusions from sources, that is called WP:SYNTHESIS. If you want the article to say Tesla has a certain citizenship, the only supporting sources allowed are sources that actually say Tesla specifically had that citizenship. --Chetvorno^TALK 15:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Please distinct local citizenship and national citizenship. I will address those as separate.

About national citizenship. There are also no source that Tesla had Austrian citizenship up to 1867. However there is a source that tells that every person living in Austrian Empire has a common Austrian citizenship. Furthermore there are sources that tell that after 1867. all people lining in the lands of Hungarian crown have common Croatian-Hungarian citizenship. This is also an answer to the allegation of original research. If by any chance it is determined that this is an original research that both Austrain citizenship up to 1867 and Croatian-Hungarian citizenship from 1867 to 1892 should be removed. However I do not think it will came to that because this are so basic claims that can not constitute an original research. A simple logic tells that is all people in Austrian Empire have Austrian citizenship then Tesla is among them. If all people in the lands of Hungarian crown have a common citizenship, then Tesla is among them. I will rest my case with this on the matter of national citizenship and the allegations of original research and your claims that sources do not Tell anything specific about Tesla. One thing is sure. No one objected when Austrian citizenship (both up to 1867 and the recent edit from 1867) was introduced that there are no sources that speak specifically of Tesla.

About local citizenship applies the same. If the sources tell that all people living in municipalities of Croatia-Slavonia have Croatian-Slavonian local citizenship, then Tesla is among them. I will further source this question since it seems that only it is under question and the matter of national citizenship is pretty much straight forward.

Lastly I would like to state that you haven't presented a single source to this discussion. Even if I'm wrong the question of Tesla's citizenship will remain unresolved. The present formulation is not sourced and it is closely coupled with my suggestion. They are based on the same principle, a common logic that if the rule of citizenship is applied to everyone, then it is applied to Tesla as well. So please present your sources. Asdisis (talk) 16:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I would like to state here that I presented a source that deals with Tesla specifically. I'm working on finding other sources, especially Croatian. For now I went trough a dozen English sources and none of them mentions which citizenship Tesla had before he became American. I know I presented a single source but sources on this question are obscure. I haven't cherry picked, and I hope the other people will help to find some more sources. Asdisis (talk) 18:44, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Reject whole RfC proposal as ORIGINAL RESEARCH, or better say, falsehood. There is a number of references, given by other users on this page, specifically stating that Tesla was an Austrian citizen. Another two proofs are his birth certificate and his passport. No proof that he ever was naturalized as a Hungarian. Croatian citizenship was reality long time after - in 1992.--65.220.39.79 (talk) 12:32, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

There is only one reference that says "As his former nationality Tesla listed Austrian". However the sources on the general case say that Tesla was obligated to list "Austrian" even if he had Hungarian citizenship. Tesla's birth certificate and his passport do not state his nationality. Furthermore, those are a clear examples of original research. Regarding Tesla only 3 sources were presented. One mentioned above, which is ambiguous and 2 sources that state "Tesla was of Croatian origin" and the other source that said Tesla was "Croat". I will make a separate section with the summary of this discussion at some point, so we avoid false claims like the one that "There is a number of references, given by other users on this page, specifically stating that Tesla was an Austrian citizen." when there is only one source that says "As his former nationality Tesla listed Austrian" and 2 other sources mentioned above that deal with Tesla specifically. Furthermore the Austrian and Croatian in those sources are not clashing, because other sources state that "there was a common affiliation to the empire" so a person of Croatian-Hungarian citizenship had this affiliation even if he had Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship. The question of local Croatian citizenship is completely untouched apart from 2 sources mentioned above that state "Croatian". Yes, the decision will be hard because not a single source exists that deal with Tesla's citizenship specifically. Only sources that mention it in one sentence without any footnote. Asdisis (talk) 13:24, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

• What some almost anonymous third class rated college teacher wrote ('local citizenship') is nothing more than permanent residency. Moreover, moving to the US, Tesla got USA permanent residency. As we see from notable European academic sources there was no ever 'Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship'. Croatia was a province of Hungary having more restricted autonomy that, say, Dalmatia and Istria, as the provinces of Austrian Empire. Please, stop spamming further this page!--65.220.39.79 (talk) 16:21, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

The base claim regarding national citizenship

Since there is an issue what constitutes an original research I started this section which will deal with that question.

Up to now, all presented sources support the following claim: "All people in the lands of Hungarian crown have a common citizenship called Croatian-Hungarian outside Hungary". That is open to debate in the upper section. For the purposes of this section we must rely on the conclusion of the above section. Then we can determine is a reasonable conclusion can be drawn and if it constitutes an original research.

The question is. Is it reasonably to conclude that Tesla who lived in the lands of Hungarian crown, outside Hungary, had Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship.

I do not think all people here are discussing in good faith, so I'm trying to simplify the discussion with this section. The walls of text will just clog the discussion and the conclusion would be that there is no clear answer when in fact I think the above claim gives a clear answer.

Remember there are two claims made in my suggestion. The claim about national citizenship and the claim about local citizenship.

• The "national citizenship" and the "local citizenship" (as offered here) are utter nonsense and ignorance not known to the international law before nor today. Please, stop spamming this page!--72.66.12.17 (talk) 17:04, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

That is what the sources tell. I do not think your word is stronger than the presented sources. You are under wrong section. In good faith I invite you to present the sources to support your claim. Asdisis (talk) 17:08, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

• • This user does not understand the basic notions he tried to elaborate. Tesla, by his birth was an Austrian citizen. All internal constitutional changes in Austria and later, Austria-Hungary did not change his citizenship status ever. Particularly, abolishment of the Militaergrenz and its inclusion into Croatia, which was a Hungarian province, has nothing to do nor ever changed a citizenship status of any Austrian citizens in the Austro-Hungarian Empire later.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 17:57, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

That is not correct. I've put the links so everyone can see for themselves. I would like to copy this to the correct section, but I'm afraid since I was accused of disruption. This is not he section to discuss and present the sources, but a section to discuss the base claim. Please, in future write under the right section. I've spent a lot of time to organize this discussion, and I've done that in good faith. I do not think that clogging the discussion by writing under wrong sections is done in good faith. Asdisis (talk) 17:52, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I would like to state that I agree with the suggestion of the others (not counting FkpCascais's raging) to find sources that speak of Tesla specifically. I'm am however keeping the sources that tell the general story about citizenship in Austro-Hungary. They prove the general claim, and I only intend to specify it to Tesla. The sources that support the general claim are still valid and a strong indicator that the specific claim about Tesla is also true. Also I do not dismiss this base claim and I expect a conclusion is reached on this claim. It would be a good idea to hear from experienced users regarding this claim. Asdisis (talk) 18:44, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

• Reject, please. There was no Croatian state nor Croatian citizenship in 19th century.--65.220.39.79 (talk) 11:49, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree with the claim that "There was no Croatian state nor Croatian citizenship in 19th century" and I had advocated for that claim the whole time, and even presented sources on that matter. Also I explained my stand to this user multiple times, and he keeps misinterpreting it. Asdisis (talk) 14:20, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

The base claim regarding local citizenship

To be done.

I will construct the base claim that determines will deal with the issue of original research and the sources not mentioning Tesla by name in the same manner as above. So we can distinct the discussion about original research and the general question about citizenship.

Asdisis (talk) 16:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Disregard this. The general consensus is that sources that deal specifically with Tesla should be presented. I agreed upon consulting Chillum. I would like to thank him on his objectivity. Asdisis (talk) 18:44, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

• Reject, please. There was no Croatian state nor Croatian citizenship in 19th century. The local citizenship is a figment of imagination of some third rated Croatian college teacher.--65.220.39.79 (talk) 11:51, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately your principle is applicable to your claim. To phrase you: your claim is a only figment of your imagination. Asdisis (talk) 13:10, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Isnt this disruption?

Asdinsis changes posts, changes the order of discussion, makes tons of edit-requests with tons of walls without anything significant for the article, he doesn't know when to stop and has no respect for other users opinion whatsoever. The latest word of his which is "Is it reasonably to conclude that Tesla who lived in the lands of Hungarian crown, outside Hungary, had Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship. ". No it is not reasonable to conclude anything of this cause all you have are some obscure Croatian sources which don't even mention Tesla, and he had Austrian citizenship, we don't fucking care about writing about national and local citizenships if we don't even have a source linking any of this with Tesla. Enough for God sake! FkpCascais (talk) 16:30, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I tried to reorganize the discussion so we can deal with specific questions separately. If I've done something wrong according to Wikipedia rules, I apologize. I won't make further changes to the structure of the discussion. I don't agree with you. I separated the issued so we can discuss them separately. That will resolve the question of walls of text. I disagree I do not have respect for other opinions. I have reorganized the discussion in good faith, and without knowing that I'm breaking some rules. I do not think you are objecting in good faith since I made this discussion simplified. I will bare the consequences but I'm prepared to argue that I had done it in good faith. Your objection may be sustained, but I'm prepared to argue that it is not done in good faith.

Yes, the base claim is "Is it reasonably to conclude that Tesla who lived in the lands of Hungarian crown, outside Hungary, had Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship. ". I made it very simple, haven't I? I also separated the question about sources to the above section. You can discuss them there. In my opinion that made the discussion simplified. My base claim is the mentioned here and I stand by it. If it is determined that it is false, then regardless of the sources my suggestion should not be accepted. That in my opinion simplified the discussion. I think the conclusion from the above statement is reasonable and I expect objective people will agree. If not, then be it, I'm wrong. I do not think you discuss in good faith, and I said my arguments which sustain my claim, from saying that Croatian and Serbian sources are not credible by default, to the claim that there is something wrong by introducing any statement containing the word Croatian in the article. That is subjective.

My claim is two way process. Firstly I'm proving with sources the following ""All people in the lands of Hungarian crown have a common citizenship called Croatian-Hungarian outside Hungary"". Then I claim that it is reasonably to conclude that this applied to Tesla specifically. If I fail on one of this steps my suggestion fails, so I made the discussion simplified.

Please present sources that claim Tesla had Austrian citizenship. If my suggestion fails, the question of Tesla's citizenship will still be an opened question, so you should definitely present sources.

Also I would like to reflect to your statement "we don't fucking care about writing about national and local citizenships". You said that I do not respect other users opinions and this statement clearly prove that you are the one who does not respect other users opinions. Furthermore your swear is just one more argument that proves that you are subjective. Also the fact that you ignored this discussion before I made a RfC , although I invited you several times, further confirms that you are subjective. You also did not object when I and KIENGIR agreed that Tesla had Austrain citizenship, which was done without any source. It was based on the original research, only on this [10] evidence. This clearly constitutes an original research, yet you had no objections because you object only when the word "Croatian appears. Asdisis (talk) 16:52, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

There are plenty of sources Tesla had Austrian citizenship, starting with the entry ticked in the states saying Austrian citizenship. We are not going to conclude anything if you don't have a reliable source saying it. Cause your logic is like this: "If on March 21, 1889, Tesla wasn't in Helsinki, Finland, then we can reasonably conclude he was in Caracas, Venezuela." He may not have had any local citizenship, he was born in Military Frontier which was directly under Vienna rule and he may well have just Austrian citizenship. We don't care what some assistant professor in Zagreb university says about local citizenship, if it is not related to Tesla. I don't care about your claim process, present a source saying Tesla had some Croatian citizenship, or otherwise go somewhere else with your synthesis and original research. Either you don't understand or you are just such an obsessed nationalistic POV-pusher who doesn't give a fuck and just goes and goes till it get what it wants. Plenty of established users already called your attention and said things to you, but you don't care. Go and report me f you want, I would just love to provide you a boomerang cause this is insane, you are making fun of this entire project. You should have been blocked for long time now for POV-pushing, not being able to disengage, for IDONTHEARYOU, you attitude is disruptive. Find sources about Tesla or otherwise leave this talk-page if all you have is synthesis and original research which is the case. FkpCascais (talk) 17:11, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Please present those sources. Also for now, it seems that you are doing an original research. Also, note that I had presented a source that confirms that claim that USA viewed all people from Austro-Hungary as Austrian citizens. My source thus tells that we can't conclude anything from foreign documents as they will state citizenship to be Austrian. I clearly described the base claim my whole case rests upon. Your analogy is not valid in my opinion. However I respect you had stated it clearly so objective people can see that your objections rest upon flaud logic. The sources are quite clear. For all lands of Hungarian crown citizenship is the same, called Hungarian in Hungary and Croatian-Hungarian outside Hungary. Thus your claim that he may had Austrain citizenship because he was born in Military frontier is falce. Furthermore, it is not in dispute that he had Austrain citizenship up to 1867, but the sources tell that had changed with Austrian-Hungarian settlement. You had not presented a single source and you are clogging the discussion intentionally with the claims that go directly against all the presented sources, yet you refuse to present sources of your own. Your statement "We don't care what some assistant professor in Zagreb university says about local citizenship" again shows that you are biased and subjective. Nothing more to add here by my, your statement perfectly describes your credibility. Again I have to repeat you own claim "you have no respect for other user's [peoples' in this case] opinions." You are subjective and you proved that in too many instances. I may even make a separate section with all your statements or object in other way about your bias, when I investigate how to state that according to wikipedia's rules. Now I will ask you directly. How and where can I object , complain or state my argumentation that you are biased and subjective, and that you have contempt towards anything Croatian? I suggest you answer or I may have use you refusal to further sustain my argumentation. I claim that you are POV-pusher since you haven't presented a single source. You demonstrated how subjective you are in numerous ways, and I called you upon that on every occasion so and everything is documented on this talk page. I strongly stand by my claims and unlike you I tend to confirm them with sources. You are the one who had not presented a single source, yet you dismissed all my sources by default, with no valid argument. I care what they said, I just do not agree. To every one I answered and presented my stand objectively. I only do not care what you say because you demonstrated your contempt, bias, and subjectivity. I do not know if there is a basis in the wikipedia's rules to report you and I'm not sure of the process. I has been a long time I had participated in discussions on wikipedia, and even back then I haven't been familiar with the rules. I do not wan't to learn all the rules of wikipedia, but I want to participate in this discussion on the most objective way. Every claim I made was supported with sources and just your statement that characterizes that as POV pushing is an argument to my claim that you are subjective. I may have synthesis and/or original research. I had even opened a separate section to discuss that. I may be wrong, but everything you are doing has no excuse. Even if I'm wrong I had participated in this discussion in good faith. I presented sources to support my claims. I constructed the base claim that will determine in an easy way if I used synthesis and/or original research. Everything I've done was in good faith, even the disruption you had accused me of. You on the other hand had not done anything in good faith. You had no objections when I agreed that Austrian should be stated as Tesla's citizenship, since you only have contempt towards Croatia. I'm sorry , but this walls of text do not help anyone and I accuse you of doing this deliberately so the discussion is clogged. We can see how much you objected and how much you had contributed, and I'm a fool since I keep answering your trolling. At the end I will be accused of posting walls of text according to that one rule of wikipeida that some people applied to me in the previous discussions. This is the last answer to your trolling. Either present the sources to disprove my sources or write your argumentation to disprove my base claim or stop trolling. You do not respect how much time I spent researching and gathering sources. I spent several full days just for the source to confirm mine and KIENGIR's suspicion that to the USA all people from Austro-Hungary were viewed as Austrian citizens. You had not researched for sources of your own so you do not know how hard it was to find a source that would specifically confirm that claim. You do not know because you haven't bothered to present a single source. I would please ask you (in the principle of good faith) or some other experienced editor to help me construct a complaint about your misbehavior. Contact me on my talk page. Asdisis (talk) 17:42, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

You are the one wanting to make changes, you are the one having to present sources that would back your proposed change. You don't have even one source saying Tesla had Croatian-Slavonian citizenship, till then there really isn't anything to discuss here. FkpCascais (talk) 18:13, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Ditto!--72.66.12.17 (talk) 18:41, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

You both need to stop the personal attacks; it can get you blocked. --Chetvorno^TALK 18:52, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I presented sources. It's funny that now you insist that sources explicitly tell something about Tesla and back when I presented several dozen sources that Tesla was born in Croatia you objected. Furthermore I and KIENGIR introduced the edit that Tesla had Austrain citizenship. You participated in that discussion and you had not objected that there was not a single source that tells specifically of Tesla. In fact it was me who insisted on that. However since then I changed my opinion since I found out that citizenship was presumed and not declared specifically for all people in the empire. That means that the act of 1867 when Hungarian citizenship was introduced for all people living in the lands of Hungarian crown, it applied to all people living there. Since then I changed my opinion according to sources. What have you done? You haven't objected when we edited citizenship to be Austrian although it was clearly done upon original research. Now you have strong objections only because the sources have directed me towards a word you despise so much, "croatian". And yes, you have to present sources to support you claims. I presented sources to support my claim, maybe they will be rejected, but you say in this matter is for sure irrelevant since you have prove yourself to be subjective, biased and with a strong despise towards Croatia. I know that I haven't presented sources that deal specifically with Tesla, but I have presented sources that tell that citizenship was presumed. That means that we do now have to deal explicitly with Tesla. I constructed a base claim and whether it will be sustained or rejected is to see. However one thing is sure, your objections are subjective and done from strong contempt towards Croatia (and also based on falud logic as you showed ealied). I do not have such contempt and if the sources lead me to include a word Croatian then so be it. I'm not pushing Croatian POV, but trying to objectively conclude what the sources tell. You on the other hand are doing just so , pushing anti-Croatian POV. If my suggestion is dismissed it won't for sure be because of your biased objections, accusations, and contempt towards Croatia. Asdisis (talk) 18:51, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Only you don't see that everyone has dismissed your sugestions long time ago. And yes, I object both Croatian and Serbian nationalistic approaches on this article. And as you recognize, you only raised the citizenship issue so you could come to this point claiming he had Croatian citizenship, so don't play games with me, you don't give a dime for Tesla, all you care is to Croatisize him, and till you don't have clear consensus and a fair number of reliable sources, yes, I will be opposing all this nationalistic attempts of yours. FkpCascais (talk) 18:55, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Some people have stated a valid argument that this constituted an original research. I constructed a base claim and I look forward what those people think about it. You already answered and I argued that your logic upon which you object is flaud. Also I stated that I find your objections irrelevant. Out of your contempt you do not even know my stand. I had not claimed Tesla had Croatian citizenship. I claimed he has Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship with the local citizenship of Croatia-Slavonia. You don't care what the sources tell. You only care that the word "Croatia" is not mentioned in the article. That much was obvious back when you objected several dozen sources I presented that told Tesla was born in Croatia. You presented it numerous times again during this discussion. You are trying to present me as someone who pushed Croatian POV in an effort to discredit me, and the fact is that you are the only one here who's not objective, not only that but you have a strong contempt towards Croatia. I went where the sources led me, and I confirmed every of my claims with sources. You on the other hand had not presented a single source in all of your objections. I sure hope that people like you who do not present a single sources can not disprove the presented sources with their misbehavior. I would be very disappointed in wikipedia, however every of this discussions is saved, and I'm happy there will be a written trail of this. Maybe I write a book on the matter of editing wikipeida and I include this discussions in it. I still hope the majority of people are objective unlike you. I will talk to them. I will report you for the accusation that I have nationalistic agenda. I supported my claims with sources and you haven't. If someone has nationalistic agenda, that is you. A person who is trying to push his way without any source. Asdisis (talk) 19:24, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Keep in mind it doesn't matter what's on this talk page, nobody is going to read it. Either side can stop this argument by not responding, leaving the other side to argue with himself. --Chetvorno^TALK 19:14, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Why is nobody going to read this? Why am I bothering with the search for sources and this whole discussion then? I spent several full days in the search for the sources so the question of Tesla's citizenship can be resolved objectively. On the other hand it is documented what FkpCascais had done. Also I would like to hear your opinion on my base claim. Asdisis (talk) 19:39, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

You are absolutely right. I just wanted to make it clear I am not opposing his edit proposal because anything else but the reasons I mentioned. Best regards, I am out. FkpCascais (talk) 19:21, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Your reason was that none of my sources mention Tesla specifically. That is why I constructed separate section to deal with that question. If you had been discussion in good faith you would thank me for reorganizing the discussion in a way that people who think original research have been done can prove that in an easier way. Instead you accused me of disrupting. Asdisis (talk) 19:36, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

• Nothing about Croatia. This encyclopedia biography should remain true to the mainstream biographies of Tesla, none of which say he was Croatian. He was Austro-Hungarian by nationality and Serbian by cultural heritage. Binksternet (talk) 20:57, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

A few reactions because I was mentioned. I do not think reverting my edit would lead to somewhere, since this status is much more valid than the former one, where a practical hole remained because of uncertainty. If there is something sure I kindly ask the one who proved it to add. I'd do the same. I don't know if it is a misunderstood, but I cannot agree with that all citizens from Austria-Hungary were regarded as Austrian citizens outside, or if yes, it is a clear mistake, since Hungarians from Austria-Hungary with Hungarian citizenship can not any case regarded Austrian citizens, never by any legal means, since not ever in history, also before the Compromise not ever a single moment in Austrian Empire anyone from Royal Hungary had Austrian citizenship, becuase they always had their own Hungarian citizenship, by this there was not any second/third level view. If i.e. the U.S. regarded them Austrian citizens, they made a clear mistake because they had Hungarian documents. I debate also having an "Austro-Hungarian" nationality. It is viable in a way regarded from outside, but only would be valid if anytime an Austro-Hungarian citizenship would existed, but such never existed. It is hard to understand for those who see a big joint political entity. Not any Hungarian, Austrian or Croatian or else declared himself having Austro-Hungarian nationality.(KIENGIR (talk) 23:14, 31 May 2015 (UTC))

But then we came to the same problem. Your edit was done on original research. The fact that no one objected is just because you haven't used the taboo word "Croatian", but the fact remains. If my suggestion is dismissed, then we do not have a single source that tells us anything about Tesla's nationality. No one presented such sources, and I urged people who disagree with me to present such sources. Yes, according to the presented sources, all people from Austro-Hungary are Austrian citizens to the foreign counties. However inside Austro-Hungary two national citizenships existed. Austrian and Hungarian, which was outside Hungary called Croatian-Hungarian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asdisis (talk • contribs) 23:29, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

About the birthplace, other Wikipedias maintain like German: Smiljan, Croatian Military Frontier, Austrian Empire. Would it solve your birthplace issue? I cannot interpret the term "national citizenship", not for Austria or Hungary for sure. I don't care the sources, A Hungarian citizen of Austria-Hungary could not any means regarded as an Austrian citizen for foreign countries, since the country neither was only Austria, and the citizenship was also not Austrian. Franz Liszt, who's ethnicity and nationality is heavily debated, the "Austrianizers" use American sources stating as "being an Austro-Hungarian citizen, he was virtually undistinguishable from any Austrian". Stupidity, he was a Hungarian citizen with Hungarian passport, with a Hungarian birthplace. This view also cannot be held to the former Austrian Empire times regarding Hungary. Ok, you say the sources say that, but the Wikipedia's own Austrian Empire, Royal Hungary and Austria-Hungary articles and the evidence presented by them will immediately abolish this POW of some foreign states. Hermann Oberth was also a Hungarian citizen, but the Anglo-Saxons immediately tried to identify him as an Austrian....he had only Hungarian and later German citizenship. Joint Austro-Hungarian, or highest level Austrian citizenship that would include Hungarian national citizenship never existed. Hungarian citizenship was an equal to the Austrian one. However, I do not exclude this regarding Croatia, although I firmly believe they should have their own citizenship, not necessarily only at "national" level.(KIENGIR (talk) 00:04, 1 June 2015 (UTC))

Not exactly, but it would be better then the present formulation. Anyways people would strongly oppose that, because it has a word "Croatian". Nevertheless I intend to resolve that question. My claim is that Military frontier is in the legal sense Croatia, although it is under military administration. The analogy is eastern Croatia which was under UN administration until reintegration in the 90'. The question is where were people born back then. In UN? If you would like to find out how it is to introduce any edit the contains the word "Croatian" try to purpose the edit to be done which would state Tesla was born in "Croatian Military Frontier". I will continue gathering evidence for my claim, and I will start a discussion when I prepare it thoroughly. For the rest I point you investigate this claim from one of my sources. "1. Austrain state constitutive law from 21st December of 1867 stated that ... for all citizens of kingdoms and lands present in the empire state council there exist a common Austrian citizenship " Asdisis (talk) 00:22, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I understand, I met similar case when Slovaks do not even want to hear "Hungary" prior 1920, so everybody was born in Slovakia, even when the state not even existed, but i.e. let an American editor to decide about it, than it cannot be stated it is again a Croatian-Serbian "war". Please give the address of the source or send me the full text. A detail you cited refers to an "Austrian constitutive law", it has no connection to Hungary and the Hungarian constitutional law. It may refer inside Austria-Hungary the Austrian side, and the lands and kingdoms inside of Austria. It is viable only like so. Austria had many territories being not originally Austrian lands, it may refer to these (i.e. Galicia and Lodomeria)(KIENGIR (talk) 14:00, 1 June 2015 (UTC))

Then you understand perfectly. If the sources tell something then we must go towards that direction. I think I presented sources that point directly to my claim, however we still need to prove it according to wikipedia's rules. I'm sorry, I investigated secondary sources and I already put the quotation upfront. I do not have source to the original law, but if you are interested I can help you find it. I don't think that the source tells that the mentioned law only applies for the lands of Austrian crown. The source is speaking about how all people from Austro-Hungary were viewed as a single political nation for foreign countries and the name that was used was "Austrian". I helped as much as I can, but I leave to you to investigate and find the mentioned law and see what it says. However note that that would be an original research. I used a secondary source according to wikipedia's rules. Asdisis (talk) 17:09, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, I am confirmed in this case, and I really don't care what foreign countries viewed, because anyway they made many confusions, even with old maps. I know the legal rules and they are presented in the Austrian Empire, Royal Hungary and Austria-Hungary articles. Austrian Empire never lawfully included Hungary. Dual citizenship were banned. The distinction by the aticles, and the Hungarian constitutional law is crystal clear. Not any case a Hungarian citizen could be regarded as Austrian, this "national citizenship" could not be applied since Hungary was an equal partner of Austria. So long the cited secondary source does not say a word of Hungary, it has to be interpreted as it is talking about the Austrian administered lands that is not the historical Austria. Even if you went to the Autro-Hungarian embassy, first you had to chose you go to the Austrian side, or the Hungarian side to arrange your case. If I am frankly sure about something, this is. Of course, the one who doesn't know the rules they judge by the King's origin or the house of the Crown, maybe because Kaiser und König were an Austrian that time, but we had also Anjou Kings. The Hohenzollern ruled Romania also. The joint entity of a Monarchy can lead easily to misunderstanding to those outside who don't know the inner rules. "Austrian state constitutive law from 21st December of 1867" -> Austrian state law has nothing to with Hungarian state law, they were totally separated.(KIENGIR (talk) 20:42, 1 June 2015 (UTC))

The sources I present agree with your claim. Austrian and Hungarian citizenships "canceled" each other. If someone had Austrian national citizenship, then he could not have Hungarian national citizenship and vice versa. I completely agree with you, and the is exactly what the sources tell (I hope I do not need to go and find a quotation since we both agree upon that). However the the sources also say what I had quoted. That is not in any way in clash with the claim we both agree. The purposed law only regulated how people living in Austro-Hungary will be treated outside. If you see Tesla's patents, you will see that he had written "subject of the Emperor of Austria...". Shortened, in one word that was written as Austrian. That is not in the clash with the claim I make, that Tesla had Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship. The conclusion is, everything you said is right and I agree, however to the foreign counties Austrian was only written as citizenship. That is only a pure statement, and the citizenship in the full sense of the word is in complete agreement with everything you said. I suggest you further investigate with the pointers I gave you. I can help you by translating what the source I have says, but note that my translation can bring ambiguity. Look at this claim "After 1867 there existed a single affiliation to the empire which was implicitly derived from the Austro-Hungarian settlement but there existed a separate affiliation to Austria and Hungary which each half administrated for itself". I think this explains it well. Your claim is correct , as you are talking about the last part of this quotation. The fist part says that "After 1867 there existed a single affiliation to the empire which was implicitly derived from the Austro-Hungarian settlement" That is the affiliation viewed by foreign countries and it is only declarative and the separate affiliation (called in the sources , national citizenship) was the one from which all concrete rights were derived. I think that this resolves your question. Also I studied sources in detain and I can tell you that the question of citizenships is a complex one. I suggest you find literature on the subject and you will see how complicated this question is. Even the leading Croatian historians disagree whether a separate Croatian citizenship existed. That is the reason I did not advocate for it to be included in the article, but for Croatian-Hungarian citizenship which was the official name used by Croatian parliament. Asdisis (talk) 23:13, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, I still disagree with that you say is legal. We cannot conclude this from Tesla's patent, since even his citizenship is debated, it is a much more bigger chance of his Austrian citizenship than Hungarian, the latter is almost impossible (and I don not refer of the national/local Croatian citizenship debate), more before 1867, so it's not a suprise if he refers to the Emperor of Austria. So long if you cannot present a factual source about this, everything remains a good aimed speculation of fragment information. If foreign countries put to everbody Austrian, it is an illegal act, a clear mistake, impossibility. I have to repeat, not any case I consider this viable, since Hungarians would not make the compromise with the Austrians, because for centuries they wanted to conquer Hungary (also lawfully), it alwas ended in an uprising and it never happened. Please until any proof - that I say to have impossible - do not present this as a factual thing. Don't minsunderstand me, I appreciate your research, but so long it is not clearly wriiten from an original document where the terms Austria-Hungary, Austria and Hungary is in one whole sentence, it remains just a theory(KIENGIR (talk) 20:44, 2 June 2015 (UTC))

Actually it's virtually impossible Tesla had Austrian citizenship. If you agree, you and I can continue our discussion on mine or yours talk page, because it includes original research and it can not reach any conclusion that would be accepted to the article. Contact me. All of your posts are based on original research. I have nothing against that, I even value it more that a source which simply says "Tesla had Austrian citizenship" without clarifying anything more. However, wikipedia's rules are against original research, so I purpose to have this discussion elsewhere. I already presented secondary sources that back up my claims. I haven't misunderstood you, and although we have a disagreement I value your objectivity. However note that I'm trying to use secondary sources and you are using original research. Statements "Hungarians would not make the compromise" and "from an original document" are original research and guessing. I again note that I want to continue this discussion because I accept your arguments, although they are original research. Contact me. Asdisis (talk) 07:51, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

• Yes, it is a disrupton. This RFC is full of spamming and trolling. There was no Croatian state nor Croatian citizenship as it was elaborated below in a separate section. For Nikola Tesla citizenship are lawful only his personal documents: the birth certificate showing that he was born as an Austrian citizen, the Austrian passport, his patent applications where he claims to be an Austrian citizen. He could be only Hungarian citizen, but there is no proof that he was ever naturalized as a Hungarian citizen.--65.220.39.79 (talk) 11:47, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

That is why I reorganized it. All the sources presented are in the first section, and the base claim regarding SYNTHESIS are in separate sections. I tend to answer a lot, and if someone people are deliberately troll, I can't do anything. I however give an objective contraarguments. I participated in your section as well although I do now know why are you opening new discussions instead of participating this one. The birth certificate? I haven't seen such document and I would appreciate you present it. However you do realize that is an original research based on primary source. I had to be confirmed by secondary sources. Same goes for passport, a primary source. Patent applications, also a primary source, and my secondary sources explained that question perfectly. I completely agree with your claim that Tesla could only be Hungarian citizen and I confirmed that with sources. At this point you do not even know my stand, and I had repeated it especially to you multiple times. I also proved that the citizenship was presumed and determined on defined principles. No proofs that Tesla went trough naturatization process. And the Hungarian citizenship was presumed. That is clear from my sources, however if more quotes are required I'm prepared to extract them from sources. Asdisis (talk) 13:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

In the case of rejecting the suggestion

In my opinion I think I proved that all people living in the lands of Hungarian crown had Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship. However because of specific wikipedia rules it seems that I can not claim that this applies to Tesla although it applies to all people among who is Tesla. The same goes for Tesla's citizenship up to 1867. Each and every person living in Austrian Empire up to 1867 had Austrian citizenship, however we can't specify if Tesla had it. I'm satisfied with what I had accomplished, although it will probably be rejected because of wikipeida's rules. This leaves us in an interesting situation. The present formulation has no sources to confirm it. It was done on the same principle that everyone advocated is against Wikipedia's rules. Thus the present formulation should be deleted until sources are found. However even then, a question has to be asked. I'm not familiar that any source that deals specifically with the question of Tesla's citizenship exist. A source that briefly stated that Tesla is Austrian citizen may exist, however I do not think that we will see a footnote next to that statement, because the source does not deal with the question of Tesla's nationality primarily. So what to state in the article? I also note that no one in this discussion tried to resolve the question of Tesla's citizenship. The present formulation can not remain on the grounds that were rejected in this discussion as against wikipedia's rules. I will strongly oppose that, so please, you who opposed my suggestion provide sources that will tell something about Tesla's citizenship. Asdisis (talk) 23:55, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I just answered above, but because of an edit conflict, this pharagraph preceded my answer. "Each and every person living in Austrian Empire up to 1867 had Austrian citizenship" -> this is not true for Hungary, but maybe you referred to the Austrian Crownlands excluding Hungary. Further details about my opinion about "national" citizenship above.(KIENGIR (talk) 00:14, 1 June 2015 (UTC))

Your continual posting here is disruptive, and your words here promise more WP:BATTLEGROUND action. This question has been discussed many times, by hot-headed Croats and hot-headed Serbs. The general consensus on this talk page over the last decade is to do as little as possible to satisfy any expressions of nationalist pride of the opposing parties. We should continue to say that Tesla was born in a part of Austria-Hungary that is today's Croatia, and that he was ethnically a Serb. Binksternet (talk) 00:17, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Dear Binksternet, if this was addressed to me, I have to refuse. I did not make any disruptive posting, also the "battleground" charge does not hold. My post are only connected to professional precisity and evaluation of information, in a manner to correct false or misunderstandable data. I don't support any nationalist pride or whatsoever. As you see, I do not intervene directly to Croatian-Serbian affiliations, but I correct false information about Hungary. Anyway the information I provided helps in a way to investigate the case, since Kingdom of Hungary is also related in this issue. (KIENGIR (talk) 13:51, 1 June 2015 (UTC))

He was obviously talking to me, and I appreciate your objectivity according to which you did not know who he was addressing. I would just like to state that it is wrong to see this discussion as a part of Croatian-Serbian affiliation. We are here to be objective. Asdisis (talk) 17:09, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Reliable sources — Tesla

This section is for listing reliable sources regarding Nikola Tesla's citizenship and the relevant excerpts from the reliable sources. Regarding what reliable sources are acceptable, please note the following excerpt from the lead of the Wikipeidia policy WP:NOR.

"To demonstrate that you are not adding OR, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and directly support the material being presented."

What this means is that the excerpt from the reliable source must be about Nikola Tesla, not just about citizenship in general for a country. Otherwise, we can't add the info to the article per WP:NOR.

I'll start it out with the following reliable source and excerpt. (This source was recently added to the article by FkpCascais and I touched it up a bit.) --Bob K31416 (talk) 23:47, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

• W. Bernard Carlson (2013). Tesla: Inventor of the Electrical Age. Princeton University Press. p. 138. ISBN 978-0691057767.

“ ‘...Yet only four or five years ago, after a period of struggle in France, this stripling from the dim mountain border-land of Austro-Hungary landed on our shores, entirely unknown and poor in everything save genius and training.' ²⁸

     Basking in the role of the poor immigrant who made good, Tesla decided it was time for him to become an American citizen. In July 1891, he filed an application in the Common Pleas Court of New York. As his former nationality he listed ‘Austrian,' but as his occupation he listed 'civil engineer,' reflecting what he had studied in Graz.²⁹ Tesla had come a long ways from his student days in Austria."

I added bold font for the main part of interest. --Bob K31416 (talk) 23:47, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately this source does not help us. All people from Austro-Hungary appeared to the foreign counties as Austrian citizens (see the source above). Nothing is being said about national nor local citizenship. This source obviously stated what Tesla wrote as his former nationality, but other sources clearly state that he was obligated to write Austria even if he had Hungarian national citizenship. Thus we can not conclude anything about Tesla's national nor local citizenship. He even may had Austrian national citizenship, but we can not know that from this source. Also if that is the case, we have a bit problem, I will deal with that later, but for now I think I proved that we can not conclude anything from this source. Asdisis (talk) 07:40, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Also, imagine if the source says that Tesla's former citizenship is Austrian. The this would bring even more ambiguity. Look at the source presented earlier: "for all for all citizens of kingdoms and lands present in the empire state council there exist a common Austrian citizenship ", the source then goes and explains the distinction between this "common citizenship", and national citizenships. The common citizenship is just declarative so all people from Austro-Hungary appear as a single political nation to the foreign countries. The word "Austrian" in this context does not have anything to do with inner Austrian national citizenship. We can not conclude anything from that source as it does not clarify anything nor it deals at all with the question of Tesla's citizenship. We have sources that explain the general concept of citizenship and although those source do not specify Tesla's case, they explain the general concept. If a source says "Austrian citizenship" and it does not clarify anything more. If it does not include a footnote to see from where this conclusion was drawn, we can not conclude ourselves if this statement is regarding the common declarative citizenship what was used in foreign affairs, national Austrian citizenship, or local Austrian citizenship. Also note one more thing. National citizenship was derived from local citizenship. A person who lives in Croatia-Slavonia has the local citizenship of Croatian-Slavonia, and he can not have Austrian national citizenship. The Croatian-Hungarian citizenship is derived from the local citizenship. Yes, the matter is complex, and I apologize for so long comments, but I can not explain it in a sentence or two. If you saw sources, they explain it even more extensively, and include dozens of footnotes. Asdisis (talk) 07:37, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

From your message, it appears that you don’t know of any source that specifically says Tesla’s citizenship or nationality was anything other than Austrian. You only have sources about citizenship in general and not specifically about Tesla’s. So we can’t put anything like that in the article per WP:NOR.

However, your message questions Tesla’s claim that his nationality was Austrian and I presume you think that we shouldn’t mention that his citizenship was Austrian in the article. You made various points in this regard. Let’s start with the first one you made and focus our attention on it.

Re your comment, "This source obviously stated what Tesla wrote as his former nationality, but other sources clearly state that he was obligated to write Austria even if he had Hungarian national citizenship.” — Please give the sources and the excerpts from those sources that support your comment. I presume they don’t mention Tesla specifically, and that’s OK for now, since this part of the discussion is about what not to put in the article (Austrian citizenship). --Bob K31416 (talk) 12:37, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Allow me to explain few things Asdinsis seems to be ignoring. The first one is that Tesla was born in the Military Frontier which was at time under direct control of Vienna (not Croatia-Slavonia), so by that Tesla would probably be able to obtain Austrian citizenship. Second, Asdinsis talks about people living in Croatia-Slavonia, but he forgets that Tesla lived in Austria proper, since 1875 in Graz, and late 1870s in Maribor, then in 1881 he moved to Budapest. So we have no reason whatsoever to disbealeave Tesla had Austrian citizenship as he was not tied at all to Croatia-Slavonia. And third thing, if Austrian citizenship is what appears to foreign world, well, that is what actually matters, it is like USA citizenship being asked in California, Ohio, Maine, it doesn't really matter. Asdinsis point is to prove he had some "local citizenship" (?) in Croatian-Slavonia so he could later claim Tesla was Croatian, which is an absurdity. FkpCascais (talk) 12:55, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment, but I would first like to hear from Asdisis because otherwise I think that my last message might not get answered. --Bob K31416 (talk) 13:05, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

This post constituted an original research. Nothing here is founded in sources, as FkpCascais had not presented a single source. Furthermore , presented sources directly oppose some claims made here. Asdisis (talk) 14:06, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

I investigated a lot, and I can say that there is no source that deals specifically with Tesla's citizenship. Some sources only briefly mention Austrian from the fact that Tesla wrote Austrian when gaining American citizenship. However now I presented sources that confirmed our doubts. To USA every person from Austro-Hungary was viewed as Austrian. I already explained that those brief mentions are ambiguous and furthermore incorrect regarding national and local citizenship. Even if I'm wrong and my suggestion is rejected, we do not have a single source that speaks specifically on this question. Look above to see what Italian encyclopedia says, that Tesla is of Croatian origin. So what to do now? It's a tough question and it is not as you said that there isn't "any source that specifically says Tesla’s citizenship or nationality was anything other than Austrian.". If it was the answer would be easy, and this discussion would not be so long. That is a way to simplistic way to present it and the way to suggest the answer. I already explained that we can't conclude anything from the statement that Tesla has Austrian citizenship. If my suggestion is rejected, I will strongly oppose to include ambiguous sources in the article, that do not include any footnote and deal with the question in only one sentence that clearly use the mentioned primary source which content is explained by sources I presented. No, I presented 2 sources that mention Tesla specifically, and I intend to find Croatian sources that are more likely do deal with the question of citizenship. Yes, I will oppose to state citizenship as Austrian, if no sources that aren't ambiguous are presented. I'm glad you understand me perfectly. Yes, my previous comment is about what not to put in the article because the source is ambiguous. I already presented a source that confirms my claim. To quote again: "...Austro-Hungary in international relations appeared as a single political subject...and that according to foreign states, all members of Austro-Hungarian empire were held as a single political nation and the territory of the empire as united in a single political subject so a single Austro-Hungarian citizenship existed [to foreign states] ... so the 1. Austrain state constitutive law from 21st December of 1867 stated that ...for all for all citizens of kingdoms and lands present in the empire state council there exist a common Austrian citizenship ". I can find more quotes to confirm my claim if needed. The claim is that separate Austrian and Hungarian(Croatian-Hungarian) national citizenships existed, however people from Austro-Hungary appeared to the foreign countries as a single political nation. Asdisis (talk) 14:06, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Could you give the source and link to the source, for the quote beginning with "...Austro-Hungary in international relations appeared as a single political subject..." that is near the end of your message? --Bob K31416 (talk) 20:59, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

I already presented that source. [11] (page 798). Unfortunately it is on Croatian. I suggest you ask FkpCascais for help with the translation. I can help as well. The whole source is interesting and I'm really disappointed I could not find any source on English that deals with the question of citizenship in Croatia in 19th century. If you want i can give a broader translation instead of dots in several places. Also look at how many footnotes the source has. Unfortunately, If you look at books about Tesla, none of them deals specifically with the question of citizenship. At most you can find that he "stated Austrian" while being naturalized, which is objective statement. The author had done no research so he says that Tesla states Austrian and not that he had Austrian citizenship. Other sources may explicitly say Austrian but no further explanation or footnote. From the context I personally can only conclude that the source for such claim is the same as for "Tesla stated Austrian", or even misinterpretation of the claim "Tesla stated Austrian" to the claim "had Austrian". In any case "Austrian" is ambiguous and we can not conclude if it is regarding Austrian or Hungarian national citizenship.In my opinion the only source that was presented and that isn't ambiguous and speaks of Tesla is Italian encyclopedia that says "of Croatian origin". Croatian-Slavonian is the most specific form of citizenship so this statement is not ambiguous. I still need to investigate Croatian sources that I think may deal more extensively with this question. Asdisis (talk) 21:54, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Here is another quotation from the same source and same page. "After 1867 there existed single affiliation to the empire..., but there existed another(special) affiliation to the Austria and Hungary...". Asdisis (talk) 23:07, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

• Asdisis, here is another reliable source that will help your cause regarding Nikola Tesla's country of birth being Croatia. From Time magazine July 23 1934 - "...in the Croatian hamlet of Smiljan where he was born." See link- http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/teslas-ray --Michael Cambridge 00:53, 3 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Cambridge (talk • contribs)

Than you, I will use it, however I had already found more than a dozen sources. I will open that discussion after this one is finished, and after I resolve one more question which ambiguity had led to the wrong conclusion in the previous discussion. Asdisis (talk) 07:37, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

"Austro-Hungary in international relations appeared as a single political subject...and that according to foreign states, all members of Austro-Hungarian empire were held as a single political nation and the territory of the empire as united in a single political subject so a single Austro-Hungarian citizenship existed [to foreign states]" -> This does not prove a single Austrian citizenship to everybody in Austria-Hungary. This would suggest an Austro-Hungarian citizenship, that never existed.

"so the 1. Austrain state constitutive law from 21st December of 1867 stated that ...for all for all citizens of kingdoms and lands present in the empire state council there exist a common Austrian citizenship". -> again, Austrian constitutive law has no any connection or affiliation to the Hungarian constitutive law. What you say may be valid for Austrian ruled lands, kingdoms, entities, as I said. Hungary was Regnum Independens! With this two secondary citation you cannot prove your point of view regarding the case. Anyway, as you asked, I will contact you on your personal page, but please, until final proof, do not propagate this a proven fact, because it is not. Thanks (KIENGIR (talk) 22:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC))

Look what the source says "After 1867 there existed single affiliation to the empire..., but there existed another(special) affiliation to the Austria and Hungary...". I explains that a single affiliation to the empire was used only declarative in international affairs. It is not a citizenship. No rights are derived from it. See the distinction it makes between a "single affiliation to the empire" and "another(special) affiliation to the Austria". I think you are misinterpreting the source in the way the you think Austrian national citizenship is equal to the "single affiliation to the empire". You can see how Tesla described that "single affiliation to the empire". He wrote on his patents "a subject of the emperor of Austria". However when a single word was to be written like in the naturalization form, the word used was Austrian which meaning is just "single affiliation to the empire", although Tesla had Croatian-Hungarian citizenship. As for the interpretation of the source, we are not allowed to do that. Yes, the source suggests a single affiliation to the empire that was in the international affairs called Austrian. It does not suggest that is a citizenship. It clearly states that there is not Austro-Hungarian citizenship. "again, Austrian constitutive law has no any connection or affiliation to the Hungarian constitutive law...", this is your interpretation of the source. I'm not saying the fact is proven, but that is what the only presented sources say. I'm open to a discussion with you. Asdisis (talk) 11:27, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Asdisis, KIENGIR is right, you are constantly talking several issues as proven facts when they are just your supositions. Your entire fight here is just because you hope to convince everyone that Tesla had Croatian-Slavonian "local" citizenship so you could next claim he is Croatian.

First of all, till now regarding the possible "local" citizenship all you have is the unpublished writing of one assistant professor from the University of Zagreb, Croatia. That is very weak source, cause everyone knows how much historical revisionism has been done in former Yugoslavia after the 1990s, so knowing the tendency, it is not strange to find people in Croatia doing their best to present some sort of independency and power Croatia had while under Habsburg rule. That is why some non-local sources are preferable.

Second thing, even if there was some Croatian-Slavonian "local" citizenship, you have no sources linking Tesla to it, and I am really disappointed that you are hoping editors will "buy" that just based on supositions. Without a source saying Tesla had it, your entire walls of text about A-H citizenships are useless for this article.

Third thing, you are constantly talking as proven fact that Tesla is linked to Croatia. I will repeat to you once again: Tesla was born in Smiljan, and at time of his birth it was part of the Military Frontier. KIENGIR, I don't know if you noticed, but Asdisis either doesn't understand or intentionally ignores what the MF was. He constantly talks as if MF was part of Croatia, like if it was just temporarily under some military control, something like, as he already said, an UN zone in Croatia during the 1990s war. That is why he says "Military zone". He doesn't understand that Military Frontier was a separate unit within the empire under direct rule from Vienna, and that the MF was much more and larger than the part of it which was annexed to Croatia later. He confuses MF with Croatian Military Frontier and thinks that they are the same. He fails to understand that the MF was the unit (what matters) and that the Croatian MF was just one inner section of the MF. By the time it started the abolishment during the 1870s and 1880s, Tesla had moved to Graz, then Maribor, and finally, Budapest.

Fourth thing, so even if there was some "local" Croatian citizenship, we couldn't speculate that Tesla had it, even if we assumed he stayed in Croatia all the time (which is how Asdinsis is making the supositions up there). Tesla was not physically tied to Croatia, right the opposite, he was born in the Military Frontier. If there were "local" citizenships, he could eventually gain Austrian one as MF was directly ruled from Vienna and regarded as direct Austrian dominion (my speculation, but valid as Asdinsis claims). He stayed some time in Karlovci attending high-school (by that time part of Military Frontier), and in 1875 he moved to Graz, inner Austria where he stayed till 1879 on a Military Frontier scholarship! In 1979 after a short stay in Maribor, he returns to Smiljan (by then not MF anymore but Croatia), and in 1880 he goes to Prague, Bohemia. And finally in 1881 he moved to Budapest where he stays one year before going to USA. So basically, he spend just one year, in Croatia-Slavonia, the rest was either in Military Frontier, Austria or Hungary. So even if proven that there was some "local" Croatian-Slavonian citizenship, we cant assume anything regarding Tesla. FkpCascais (talk) 14:00, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Forgeries and misinterpretation of history on this talk page

I see that some Croats are talking about Croatia as something more than a (Hungarian) province within Austria-Hungary. Croatian citizenship!! Moreover, the Kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia and Dalmatia - regardless what we see in the Tesla's pasport - was just a part of wishful thinking. For more details see

The Habsburg Monarchy, 1809-1918: A History of the Austrian Empire and Austria-Hungary by A. J. P. Taylor

Page 209: In October, 1905 - at the very moment when Fejervary announced the policy of universal suffrage - Croat liberals met Croat representatives from Istria and Dalmatia at Rijeka (Fiume). The "Fiume resolutions" demanded the reunion of Dalmatia with Croatia and agreed to support Magyar opposition in return for fairer treatment of the Croats.

...

The "Fiume resolutions" did not threaten the existence of the Habsburg Monarchy, even by the most remote implication; they asked only for national freedoms enjoyed by most peoples of Austria, and even by the Croats in Istria and Dalmatia. The only "corporate" demand was not for a South Slav state, nor even for South Slav unity within the Empire: it merely asked for a Croatia enlarged by the reunion of Dalmatia, a demand which the Croats had made in 1867 and even before.

Page 269: The Croats claimed that Dalmatia belonged to the Croatian Crown and seats were reserved for the Dalmatian representatives in the Croatian Diet; in reality Dalmatia was part of constitutional Austria and was represented in the Reichsrat.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 12:33, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

The discussion about citizenship is opened above and you can join it with your sources. About the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia, I do not think this is the place to discuss Croatia's position within Austro-Hungary. There is a separate article ( here Kingdom_of_Croatia-Slavonia), and you can start a discussion there. I will just state that the name "Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia" was officially used, as we can see it stated on Tesla's passport, so your claim that "regardless what we see in the Tesla's pasport - was just a part of wishful thinking" if false. However, let's leave that to the separate discussion on the talk page of Kingdom_of_Croatia-Slavonia. Also, since I think your statement that "...some Croats are talking about Croatia..." is directed to me, I wish to state that I haven't stated my nationality, or ethnicity, and that I mind being "accused" of being a Croat, as if that is something wrong with that. The context of that statement is an ad-hominem attack, since I haven't stated my nationality, so please sustain yourself from ad-hominem attacks. Asdisis (talk) 14:08, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

• • This user does not understand the basic notions he tried to elaborate. Tesla, by his birth was an Austrian citizen. All internal constitutional changes in Austria and later, Austria-Hungary, did not change his citizenship status ever. Particularly, abolishment of the Militaergrenz and its inclusion into Croatia, which was a Hungarian province, has nothing to do nor ever changed a citizenship status of any Austrian citizens in the Austro-Hungarian Empire later.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 17:59, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

My sources directly disprove your claims which are currently unfounded. In a good faith I suggest you find sources to confirm your claims. Asdisis (talk) 18:10, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

• • • Your sources are just showing that you do not understand the basic notions you tried to elaborate.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 18:22, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah? Well, you know, that's just like, a, your opinion man. Asdisis (talk) 18:33, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't agree that citizenship status could not be ever changed. I see impossible lands returned to Hungary with personal union would maintain Austrian citizenship in the future. It is impossible. However, really, a Official Croatian Military History institue should be asked, or national archives should be searched to really know what was that time in Croatia-Slavonia. Those sources not any case could be doubted. Any country decides on his own about citizenship (KIENGIR (talk) 23:22, 31 May 2015 (UTC))

All you show here is ignorance which does not qualify you to say anything. Tesla was by his birth an Austrian citizen. No proof that he ever was naturalized as a Hungarian, for only a documented naturalization of a person can be a proof of a changed citizenship. Croatian citizenship came into existence in 1992.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 00:21, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Please do not make personal attacks. See Wikipedia policy WP:NPA. --Bob K31416 (talk) 00:32, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Naturalization as a process was not done as you suggest. I presented a whole source that deals with the question of naturalization. I agree, there isn't any evidence of Tesla went trough process of naturalization. However the Croatian-Hungarian citizenship was presumed for all people living in the lands of Hungarian crown. No one went trough the process of naturalization. From 1867 they were presumed to be Croatian-Hungarian citizens. I will include more quotes from the sources I presented that deal with that question extensively. Asdisis (talk) 07:02, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Undeniable fact about Tesla's citizenship

From https://www.google.com/patents/US382279?dq=Nikola+Tesla&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DE5rVeTJE435yQSU4oOYAQ&ved=0CFwQ6AEwCQ

UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE.

NIKOLA TESLA, OF NEW YORK, N. Y., ASSIGNOR OF ONEHALF TO CHARLES F. PEOK, OF ENGLEWOOD, NEW JERSEY.

ELECTRO-MAGNETIC MOTOR.

SPECIFICATION forming part of Letters Patent No. 3232.279. dated May 1, 1888.

Application filed November 30, 1887. Serial No. 256,561. (No model.)

To all whom it may concern:

Be it known that I, NIKOLA TESLA, a subject of the Emperor of Austria, from Smiljan, Lika, border country of Austria-Hungary, now residing at New York, in the county and State of New York, have invented certain new and useful Improvements in Electrolriagnetic Motors, of which the following is a specification, reference being had to the drawings accompanying and forming a part of the same.

--72.66.12.17 (talk) 18:14, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Why don't you join the above discussion, instead of creating all this new discussions. Unfortunately , US documents can not help us in our discussion since all people from Austro-Hungary were viewed by USA as Austrian citizens. That is what the sources tell us. Furthermore, this statement supports my sources. All people in Austria-Hungary were subjects of the emperor. Read the sources I presented, especially the quotations I drew from them. Asdisis (talk) 18:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

• Your sources are not even sources. Even worse, none of them stated that Tesla was a Croatian Ban subject. So, what are you talking about?--72.66.12.17 (talk) 18:39, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I think I do not have further to answer to your personal claims that my sources are not credible. You had not presented a single valid argument regarding that matter. The claim that my sources do not talk specifically of Tesla stands, and thus I had constructed a base claim. Not only that but I intend to present further sources that tell how citizenship was determined. Also the source that says "According to the Croatian-Hungarian Compromise, the legislation on acquisition and loss of citizenship was common for all the lands of the Hungarian Crown while their execution was decentralized so the Croatian-Slavonian Ban had full executive powers in the matters of national citizenship" tells exactly that Tesla and every other Croatian-Hungarian citizen was a subject of Croatain Ban.Asdisis (talk) 19:03, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

• • I told you that you do not understand what are you reading and trying to interpret. The " acquisition and loss of citizenship " is not applicable to an Austrian citizen even if he lived in Hungary. Croatia was just one of the Hungarian provinces. Tesla did not get his Austrian citizenship from Croatian Ban nor lost his Austrian citizenship ever.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 19:49, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not interpreting anything, you are dong that. The statement "The " acquisition and loss of citizenship " is not applicable to an Austrian citizen even if he lived in Hungary." isn't even your personal interpretation, but your made up claim. If you find a source that tells exactly that, then present it. Until then I do not see how your unfounded claims can have any weight to the presented sources. Asdisis (talk) 19:59, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

No, the above is not my personal interpretation. It comes from Utjesenovich-Ostrozinski, O.M. Die Militärgrenz-Frage und der osterreichisch- ungarische constitutionalismus / O.M. Utjesenovich-Ostrozinski .— 2. Aufl. — : Geitler, 1869. You have to read more and understand more. Focusing on a number of very nationalistic sources, even not completely understanding them, leads you nowhere. I'll repeat: there was no national Croatian citizenship, for Croatia was just a Hungarian province, not a state. I'm out.--72.66.12.17 (talk) 20:08, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Please provide the quotation and a page number. Also a link to the source would be helpful. You made up so many claims that I simply can not believe in your word. I agree that there was no Croatian citizenship, neither I argued that there was. There was only one common national citizenship in all lands of Hungarian crown, called Hungarian in Hungary and Croatian-Hungarian outside Hungary. Also there existed a local Croatian-Slavonian citizenship. This is what the sources tell us. If you think that is wrong then ok. Present your sources. I think you went in a good way by stating that this source tells something, however a link to the content, and a page number and a quotation would be helpful. Again we can't just believe your word. Asdisis (talk) 20:17, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

72.66.12.17 -> "Croatia was just one of the Hungarian provinces." False, Hungary did not have "provinces". There was Kingdom of Hungary, and Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia, and the personal union between them. Kingdom of Hungary regarded - as always in history - Croatia a state. Be more precise! (KIENGIR (talk) 23:28, 31 May 2015 (UTC))

This argument has been going on a long time, it fills the entire talk page. One side can end it by simply refusing to respond to the other side. Then the only person the other side has to argue with is himself.--Chetvorno^TALK 23:50, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Asdisis, you know that you have had my full support in the past and I support you now in regard to Tesla having local Croatian-Slavonian and/or Croatian-Hungarian citizenship, and you always present reliable sources. The anti-Croatia stance taken by the Serbian editors of this article is utterly disgusting. You are right, they just don't want to see the word 'Croatia' or 'Croatian' in the article. They are preventing the article from being truthful and encyclopedic and they should be ashamed of themselves. Michael Cambridge 00:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Cambridge (talk • contribs)

• You do realize most of the people opposing are not Serbian, and probably don't give a toss about the petty nationalistic fight? Binksternet is pretty clearly American, for example. Oh, and it's an obvious lie to claim that everyone (or even anyone) is trying to censor Croatia from the article; that's blatantly not the case. I will continue to oppose any change to the status quo myself until we see reliable sources that are not being synthesized. This is yet to ever happen. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 01:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

It's not important who someone is, but only arguments and sources. I remember that user Director had tried to give himself some credibility by stating that he is Croatia and that we should believe him when he says something that is not supported by sources. I was strongly against that and I'm strongly against any ad-hominem attach. If someone is subjective, biased, or has a contempt I feel that should be stated and supported with arguments in the manner I did for FkpCascais. I would also like to state, based on the same principle that your statement that "Binksternet is pretty clearly American" would be subjective. I haven't looked who someone is not I had tried to use that in favor or against their case. That is a subjective thing to do. The fact that someone is American does not mean he is completely objective regarding this topic. Not that I'm saying anything about the mentioned used, but I'm talking in general. Asdisis (talk) 16:52, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Asdisis, I found another link that might be of some help. In the photo gallery there is a picture of what appears to be an excerpt from Nikola Tesla's bank account. When I put it through google translate it says- First Savings Bank of Croatia in Zagreb. At the bottom it says- Nikola Tesla unknown place of residence in America. Now surely Tesla would have had to have had some kind of Croatian citizenship in order to have a Croatian bank account at that time. Here is the link http://drzavno2012.pgsri.hr/zadatak1/zabok/galerija.html Worth investigating. Michael Cambridge 02:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Cambridge (talk • contribs)

Tesla had savings account in a bank in Zagreb. He must be Croatian then!!! Four generations in my family have savings account in UBS, that means we are all Swiss? I didn't even knew, I am yodeling already! FkpCascais (talk) 04:04, 1 June 2015 (UTC) PS: You claim not to speak Croatian, right? Can you tell me how do you use Google translate in a picture? I would like to know "Mr. Cambridge". FkpCascais (talk) 04:32, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Simply re-type the words into Google translate "Mr FkpCascais". I don't know what the law was when Tesla lived in Croatia but it could be possible that he needed to have some sort of Croatian citizenship or permit of residency to have a Croatian bank account. Perhaps that is something that Asdisis could research. Michael Cambridge 13:37, 1 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Cambridge (talk • contribs)

At the time of socialist Yugoslavia, you had to have local (Yugoslav) citizenship in order to have an account in some Yugoslav bank. But this is prior to that, either when Zagreb was within Austro-Hungary or within Kingdom of Yugoslavia (capitalism in both cases) when there were probably no restrictions of that kind in the banking system. FkpCascais (talk) 14:10, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Michael Cambridge thank you for this sources. I have looked for Tesla's naturalization papers and I couldn't find them anywhere(except ancestry.com where one needs to pay to see it). This is a great find. I have already investigated and proved that all people living in the lands of Hungarian crown outside Hungary had Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship and Croatian-Slavonian local citizenship. Notice the formulation "outside hungary". That is a claim that further supports my claim that Military zone was in the legal sense Croatia-Slavonia. I'm glad with this discussion, because I have set the direction to all objective people to investigate for sources. An objective person would agree that Tesla most certainly had mentioned citizenships, and participate in finding sources that would prove the claim according to wikipedia's rules. Also I proved one more important thing. If I find a source that says Tesla had those citizenships I mentioned no one can disprove those sources with the sources that Tesla had Austrian, or Hungarian citizenship. That is a great accomplish, since sources on this matter are obscure and even when they exist, they do not deal specifically with the question of Tesla's citizenship. This discussion made way so only one source is enough to prove my claim, of course if no sources that directly oppose that claim are presented. And I established that sources that mention Hungarian or Austrian citizenship do not oppose the sources that mention Croatian-Hungarian national citizenship. I also made a distinction in national and local citizenship. That is objectively a great accomplish. Also this discussion is a great experience for the discussion about Tesla's birthplace since I now can recognize original research. The claim that FkpCascais and many others used in the discussion about Tesla's birthplace was the Military zone was not Croatia, so Tesla could not be born in Croatia. I found now that that constitutes an original research, and this is great. That means I do not have to bother to investigate historical aspect Military zone and Croatia, because that would anyways be original research. I only have to do the same as in this discussion. Prove that sources that state Tesla was born in Austrian Empire do not negate that he was born in Croatia (Kingdom of Croatia). That is a claim that does not even have to be proved because I do not think that anyone will object that Kingdom of Croatia was part of Austrian empire. Also I'm glad that I can use people's own arguments in this discussion against them in the discussion about Tesla's birthplace. I will start that discussion after this RfC, within the next month. Asdisis (talk) 16:40, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Fact "A" (born in Austrian Empire Military Frontier) and fact "B" that the "Military zone (could be?) in the legal sense Croatia-Slavonia" is (as has been pointed out many times) WP:SYNTHESIS, A + B does not equal conclusion C (no matter what conclusion C is). Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 21:43, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I concur. Most of the vast verbiage that has been wasted on this subject above is irrelevant as far as the article is concerned. --Chetvorno^TALK 21:56, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I disagree. For the general claim the sources stand. We just need to find sources that will specify that claim to the individual person, Tesla in this case. The general claim brings the context and with the presence of the specific sources about Tesla the general claim is gives support to the specific claim. Imagine if the general claim says that all people in Austrain Empire had Austrain citizenship and we find sources that tell Tesla had Hungarian citizenship (for example). Then we would have inconsistent sources upon which we can't draw any conclusion. Is all sources, the general and the specific one say the same thing then they complement each other. I've studied logic and participated in many objective debates, and I haven't yet participated a debate as hard as this ones about Tesla here on wikipedia where it seems that too many people do not follow the common logic and common sense. I'm glad this arguments are documented and I look forward to study them in future. Also I have to mention one thing of utmost importance. The sources that deal with the general question of citizenship in Austro-Hungary must be used when evaluating a certain source. For instance in some source says Tesla had Austrian citizenship then we can not conclude anything from that, because we know from the sources that there existed Austrian citizenship common to all people living in Austro-Hungary, then 2 national citizenships Austrian and Hungarian(called Croatian-Hungarian in Croatia-Slavonia), and then local citizenships, for instance Croatian-Hungarian, Hungarian...I haven't gone so far to determine all local citizenships that existed. So the source stating just Austrian without any footnote or any further explanation can not be evaluated and nothing can be concluded upon it. We must find sources that deal exclusively on the question of Tesla's citizenship. So I think I accomplished something useful with my research. Asdisis (talk) 22:12, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

For once, we completely agree. This is an objective claim and I support such claims although your credibility is in my opinion long gone. Also your arguments from the previous discussion that Tesla was born in Military frontier(A) which was not part of Croatia(B) thus Tesla was not born in Croatia(A+B) constitute WP:SYNTHESIS. Now we have a problem, because that was the main argument in the previous discussion. Asdisis (talk) 22:00, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

When something is stated flat out in a reliable source it is not WP:SYNTHESIS. Whether it is right or wrong is another mater. In this case someone who is an equally reliable historian would have to write and publish an equally reliable source stating the opposite. We go from there in discussion, but you have to have that source first. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

There are no much sources that deal with the question of Tesla's citizenship. I presented the ones I could find. If that isn't enough then be it. However I will demand that the present formulation is removed in the grounds that it is "stated flat out in a reliable source". Especially in this discussion continues in the same manner that everyone just opposes. I urge everyone to present sources of their own that will at least support the present formulation so the article does not contain a gap from Tesla's birthday to his naturalization by USA. I'm just presenting the sources I find, you may say anything you want about them. I may be wrong, but the claim that the present formulation has to be removed on the same grounds my sources are being rejected stands. So please let's stop fighting and present sources to resolve this question in the most objective way. If this question can not be resolved then by Chillum's suggestion, we will leave a gap. Asdisis (talk) 22:31, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Asdisis, for this I made an answer above (it is in the is it disruption? section). I have to repeat here: "For instance in some source says Tesla had Austrian citizenship then we can not conclude anything from that, because we know from the sources that there existed Austrian citizenship common to all people living in Austro-Hungary, then 2 national citizenships Austrian and Hungarian(called Croatian-Hungarian in Croatia-Slavonia), and then local citizenships, for instance Croatian-Hungarian, Hungarian.." -> the claim for a common Austrian citizenship to all people living in Austria-Hungary is false. See my arguments as mentioned above. It is your suggestion, but not any legal original document were presented about this, where all the subjects are mentioned. Please do not state it as fact, until proven - although I firmly think this to be impossible. More details in the "disruption" section.(KIENGIR (talk) 20:52, 2 June 2015 (UTC))

I can not present original documents. It's against Wikipedia's rules. I presented secondary sources that confirm my claim. Asdisis (talk) 07:56, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Maybe we misunderstand each other regarding original research, and original documents. I aswered above why your two secondary source cannot confirm your claim. So I meant, if we'll have a source that directly quotes from the original documents as it written and we have the full sentence and text, then we can see what is proves or not. Anyway, citing from an original document cannot harm any Wikipedia rule, since it is often used. We cannot judge this by two, a little bit obscure half-sentences. I hope you agree with that.(KIENGIR (talk) 22:23, 3 June 2015 (UTC))

Yes, but the sources I presented deal specifically ans extensively with the question of nationality. I presented several quotes not just one, and I noted to footnote to the original documents that is the ground to make those claim. Remember that I mentioned the law and the exact date it was established. The source then interprets that law and I quoted on it. You interpreted the law by yourself while I presented a source that interprets the law. You think the source interprets the law in the wrong way, but that is again original research. I'm moving this discussion to the my talk page, and If we come up with a conclusion or secondary sources we can present them here. Asdisis (talk) 11:06, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

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?

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?

• Support as proposer. This talk page has hosted perennial debates about Tesla's nationality for years. These discussion become very lengthy, contentious, and time consuming. A larger concern is that discussions about improving other aspects of the article are lost amid these mountains of texts. For example, this talk page at the time of posting this RfC, is well over 20,000 words. By limiting nationality discussions to a dedicated talk page, those who wish to continue debating it can, while those who wish to discuss article improvements can use the default talk page.- MrX 20:40, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
• Support. FkpCascais (talk) 20:50, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

A support to move the discussion to an obscure place from a person who refused to participate although I invited him in good faith several times because I know he strongly opposes, then when I opened the RfC objected to the point of misconduct is at least suspicious. Asdisis (talk) 12:57, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't have anything else to say to you. Down in the new thread you say Tesla has Hungarian-Croatian citizenship without any sources, just conspiracies of your own, you are totally out of control. Also, in all this time you still don't even know what the Military Frontier was, you still talk the nationalistic crap it was all Croatia, so discussing with you is useless. I really feel sorry this project allows you to do this madness for so long. PS: Please stop talking all the time about me, as you see, besides your possible sockpuppet Cambridge, anyone else disagrees with you, and no one here is anti-Croatian, people just see your syntheses and lack of sources, while I, besides that, see your final point, which is to add as much Croatia as possible to the article, so one more reason to disengage from this discussion with you, cause you don't have a case here. FkpCascais (talk) 13:21, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't have anything else to say to you. This is how you do it if you do not have anything to say. Asdisis (talk) 13:58, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

• Support. Yes, please.Constant314 (talk) 21:03, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
• Suppport. Yes, everyone knows he was really a Karaim!--Pharos (talk) 21:14, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
• Support. I'd further suggest that past discussions on that topic on this page be moved to the sub-page. --Chetvorno^TALK 21:44, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
• Support: tying up this page with what looks like not very good faith requests gets us nowhere. People can discus this till the cows come home on the sub-page. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 21:54, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
• Suppport if that does not mean the discussion are being moved from the place where all people can discuss them objectively to the obscure place where no one will see the discussion if it is opened. This request can be done both in good faith and otherwise. In good faith as explained above and with not so good intentions to limit all discussions to one place where people won't find them to participate. I can not know the motives of the all people who voted to supported this suggestions, but I'm sure FkpCascais had not done so in good faith. I have to note that I opened a discussion which was ignored by everyone (most notably FkpCascais ), although they expressed they disagree and although I invited them several times, until I opened a RfC. It is sad that there is no will to answer opened questions objectively, and the question of Tesla's citizenship is an opened question since the present formulation is completely unfounded in sources. I support this suggestion in good faith. Asdisis (talk) 22:02, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose I oppose this suggestion if that means the discussion is being moved to the obscure place to hide it from other people in an effort to make them obscure and not relevant. Also if objective discussions are grouped together in the sub-page that is generally under bad name as full of nationalistic wars then that can have negative prejudice which may be intended by some people who expressed their contempt earlier. I oppose this suggestion in good faith. Asdisis (talk) 22:22, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
• Support but please link to the discussion from other talk pages where this issue comes up. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:14, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I support your suggestion. That would work, but we will still have a problem that people deliberately ignore the discussion until someone opened RfC which was the case we have not. Asdisis (talk) 12:57, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

• Support, obviously. That's what the page is for. I would also say that we should put a 6-month moratorium on any further requests, because I'm sure we're all sick of having our time wasted by nationalistic editors who are perfectly happy to synthesize sources. Oh, and Asdisis, stop accusing FkpCascais of acting in bad faith, when you're no better yourself - also, you can't oppose and support this request at the same time. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 00:43, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

It should be possible to open a discussion and present new sources. If we forbid that then in my opinion we are doing exactly against what Wikipedia stands for. Yes the discussions are hard, but nonetheless is is not the right way to forbid them. I've been working for many years to reinstate the discussion on Tesla's birthplace and I've been doing that objectively. I am investigating for sources and working to objectively present the case for another evaluation. People do not understand that the discussion is useless if we do not resolve the question. Yes, my suggestion can be rejected, but people will open new discussions because the question of Tesla's citizenship will remain an open one, since no one is trying to resolve it. Most of the people are trying to prevent me to resolve it, but notice that they are not presenting sources that would resolve the question. They just criticise and they do not participate the discussion. I am not accusing FkpCascais but his conduct. I supported my claim that his conduct is biased, subjective and with a strong contempt towards Croatia. In any normal debate I am allowed to criticise the wrong approach. I do not know If I'm allowed to do that according to wikipedia's rules, but that can be discussed I hope so. One thing is sure. Someone may be wrong but still discussing in good faith. Someone may be right but he may be discussing in bad faith. I disagree that I'm not better myself that the mentioned user. I haven't used personal insults, unless if you think that my statement that the mentioned user is biased when he says that Serbian or Croatian sources are by default not credible, then ok. But I think that statement would just point that you are also the one who is biased, so I hope you are not claiming that. I can I can't have two votes at the same time. By that act I showed that the suggested action can be purposed both in good faith and not in good faith. For instance when a user (most notably FkpCascais ) who so strongly disagrees with me to the point that he deliberately ignores the discussion I opened although I, in good faith invited him several times because I knew he strongly opposes, now votes to move the discussion on some obscure place where no one looks, I as an objective person must doubt his motives. Asdisis (talk) 12:37, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Also your allegation that I am a nationalistic editor earned you a report. I may be wrong, I may have synthesized sources but your allegation is false. I have done everything in good faith, and even if I'm wrong that does not mean I haven't participated in good faith. It simply means I'm wrong. I agreed that I may be wrong and went to further discuss the possibility of that. I constructed a base claim in a good faith to help the discussion. Furthermore I supported each and every claim with a source, and I have not cherry picked those source not someone accused me of that. You will be reported as soon as I remember and figure out how to do that. There you will have to explain your allegation. Asdisis (talk) 12:57, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose There is really no need to hide anything and anyone who wants to get involved is free to do so. Oh, and Lukeno94 it would be nice if you stopped telling people what to do. Could you tell me who is synthesizing sources here because the ones that I have presented are certainly real and I'm sure the sources Asdisis has are real. Lukeno94 I sense you fear that Asdisis has found legitimate information you don't want the world to know about. I could be wrong. You tell me.--Michael Cambridge 03:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Cambridge (talk • contribs)

• I'm a fucking Brit. You think it makes one iota of difference to me whether someone is Croatian, Serbian, Montenegrin or from the bloody Moon? It doesn't. If someone would present a case that was actually convincing for Tesla having a Croatian nationality, and not just being born in a town that in modern day times is in Croatia, then it would be worth considering. But that hasn't happened yet. There's a difference between sources being "real", and them actually being reliable and being unsynthesized. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 09:32, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Let's all try to avoid imputing bad motives in other editors and respect the spirit of WP:NO PERSONAL ATTACKS. --Chetvorno^TALK 10:36, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Having problems controlling your emotions? What do you think, how do I feel after you had called me a nationalistic editor, after I spent several days investigating sources to support each and every of my claims? It seems that very little people appreciate when someone takes time to investigate sources. I will use this reaction of yours in my report. It shows that you have double standards. You had no problem calling me a nationalistic editor which is in the topic with high national tensions the words ad-hominem attack. I had not expressed a single emotion during this whole discussions and I had taken your insult the in the completely different way than you. Asdisis (talk) 13:56, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

In response to the oppose, that itself is a personal attack, so I don't think criticizing Lukeno's reply to this as a personal attack is constructive. Epic Genius (talk) 20:35, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

• Support. It is getting tiresome. I think {{Round in circles}} is ineffective, perhaps FAQ should be added.--Zoupan 03:31, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree it's tiresome. Imagine yourself on my place. I spent days investigating for sources and a lot of time writing this comments while I haven't seen any other editor even bothers to resolve the question of Tesla's citizenship (well the IP guy now showed some sources and I than him on objective approach). I do not understand how FAQ works on wikipedia, but we can not answered the question since this is an opened question. We should firstly resolve the question. Thus I do not think the "it's tiresome" argument is valid in an effort to forbid or hide the discussion from the public view. I see that no one thanked Michael Cambridge for the sources he presented, and I don't think anyone would look on some obscure place. No one would see that sources and the sources include some interesting documents, like Tesla's highschool diploma and his naturalization papers which I had been long looking for. Asdisis (talk) 12:57, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

"forbid", "hide" and "obscure", clearly showing (tiresome) POV. It is a sub-page, and not a black hole. The question has long been answered. Read: "Serbian American" and "Born 10 July 1856 Smiljan, Austrian Empire (modern-day Croatia)". You need to accept this (deal with it), despite the fact that the "issue" is your account's lifework.--Zoupan 13:21, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

The question about Tesla's birthplace was not answered and it is still an open question. As long as it is open, new discussions will be open. I don't know how else you define "no consensus", but to me "no consensus" means the question was not resolved. Asdisis (talk) 14:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose. Conceivably, because of limited viewership (with sensible editors staying away), an atypical "consensus" might be achieved on the subpage, resulting in high drama when the new "consensus" is brought here to be implemented. I'm in favor of putting a limit on nationality discussions, but the limit should be placed here, and watched here. I consider the subpage to be an archive of old nationality discussions. Binksternet (talk) 03:58, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Agree. I know it is difficult to discuss on pages of high national tension but the only way to deal with this is to discuss objectively and present sources until some claims are established and founded in sources and objectivity. To forbid the discussions or to move them in an obscure place is not the way Wikipedia works. At least I expect so. Asdisis (talk) 12:37, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Binksternet, I understand your objection, but any edits to the subpage will show up on everyone's watchlist. We can put a note at the top of this Talk page that the subpage is about a controversial topic and should be monitored. I know I will keep an eye on it. Considering how boring and irrelevant most of the nationality debate is, anyone that ignores the subpage discussion would probably also ignore it on the main Talk page. So atypical consensus and "drama" when they try to change the article is probably inevitable. But when a change to the article is made people will rally round. I like your idea of putting a limit on nationality discussions, but I don't see how that could be done. --Chetvorno^TALK 20:55, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

• Strongly oppose to any further discussion about Tesla's ethnicity and citizenship. Allowing such 'discussion' is equal to allowing spamming and trolling. --65.220.39.79 (talk) 11:55, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

That would be sustained if Wikipedia is North Korea's project. Asdisis (talk) 12:37, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Your comment is basically trolling. There is not a chance that such discussion won't happen in the future, because new editors will inevitably be asking these questions. Epic Genius (talk) 20:35, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

• Support. Consolidating the topics about race and thnicity into one subpage makes it easier for readers to access, and it can be linked from the top in a {{FAQ}}. There are many conspiracy theories about Tesla's ethnicity, which can be dealt with at a subpage. Epic Genius (talk) 20:31, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
• Support. A reasonable proposal for a perennial debate. Binksternet raises a legitimate issue, but something can probably be worked out. For example, that page could be used for discussion and debate, while any RFCs would take place on this page. Or RFCs could be announced on this page. It's not an insurmountable problem. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:31, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

• Support I have been involved in discussions that dominate article talk pages before. It has always been helpful to make a sub page. You put a little banner at the top and everyone can see it. The discussion gets its own watch list and this page can be used for other parts of the article that would otherwise get drowned out. I think existing discussions should move there too. Chillum 01:22, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

European historians: Croatia-Slavonia was a Hungarian province, there was no Croatian citizenship or nationality

Reference 1. The Millennium of Hungary and Its People edited by József Jekelfalussy Pesti könyvnyomda-részvénytársaság, 1897

Page 230: However it is only the affairs of Religious service and Public instruction which in their fullest extent belong to the province of territorial autonomy whereas in the province of home affairs with regard to questions of association, of passports, of police supervision over foreigners, of the rights of citizenship, and of naturalization, the executive only belongs to the autonomy; while the legislation on these subjects is a common one. For this reason there is also no separate Croatian citizenship.

Pages 234-235: The organization of the Croatia-Slavonian-Dalmatian National Assembly is on the basis of the one chamber system and the principle of indirect votes for the great part:

...

Deputies are chosen according to districts, i.e. every district chooses a deputy. The conditions for the possession of a vote are (a) Hungarian citizenship; (b) the fact of belonging to a Croatian-Slavonian community ...

Reference 2. Catholic World, Volume 109, Paulist Fathers, 1919

Pages 349-350: Hungarian writers assert that Croatia was reduced by force of arms. She lost entirely autonomous life and was incorporated as a conquered province in the Hungarian kingdom. "An independent Croatia is an historical absurdity," writes C. M. Knatchbull-Hugessen. "Croatian citizeship is a myth. The king of Hungary is at the same time the king of Croatia". "From a political point of view,' writes Jellinck, "Croatia and Slavonia are nothing than fully equipped provinces of Hungary"

Reference 3. The Political Evolution of the Hungarian Nation, Volume 2 by Cecil Marcus Knatchbull-Hugessen Brabourne (4th Baron) National Review Office, 1908

Pages 312-313: The Habsburg who is crowned King of Hungary, ipso facto becomes King of Croatia - an indivisible part of the realms of the Sacred Crown, so expressed by the laws of 1723 and 1868. The Ban does not come in direct contact with the King, as he would necessarily do if he were the chief official of an independent State, but communicates with the Crown through the Croatian member of the Hungarian Ministry, who is responsible to the Hungarian Parliament, whose countersignature is necessary to give validity to the countersignature of the Ban of official nominations and other royal acts. Further the Ban himself is nominated by the Magyar Prime Minister, who countersigns the royal appointment made in pursuance of such nomination. There are no Croatian or Hungaro-Croatian Ministers or Parliament within the realms of St. Stephen. Parliament is Hungarian, and the Ministers are Hungarians servants of an indivisible State of which Croatia-Slavonia forms an integral part. There is no Croatian citizenship or nationality. As a member of the Sacred Crown Croatia was affected by the results of the Compromise of 1867, and as such member would have no power of independent action should the law of that year be abrogated or modified, save in so far as it is entitled and enabled to make its voice heard through its delegates to the Hungarian Parliament should a revision of Compromise affect its local or common interest, or necessitate an alteration of financial relations with Hungary on whom Croatia's insolvent autonomy lays a considerable burden.

Bottom line. Protect Wikipedia dignity by preventing blogging, trolling, and spamming on this talk page.--65.220.39.79 (talk) 12:01, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I won't touch to the position of Croatia within Austro-Hungary since I'm involved in the discussion about Tesla's citizenship. You can start the discussion in the talk page of Croatia-Slavonia article. However the claim that "Croatian citizeship is a myth" does not tell us anything new. Again it is not specified is the assertion regards national or local citizenship, so I'm doing under the assumption that it refers to national. Then I agree, no separate Croatian national citizenship. If someone does not agree with my assumption, then we can not know if the source is speaking about national or local citizenship. Asdisis (talk) 12:16, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I concur. My sources also tell that the separate Croatian national citizenship does not exist, neither I had claimed it existed. In my opinion this source is speaking of national citizenship. Local citizenship is another question and if the source does not specify which it is referring, it is reasonable to conclude it is speaking of national citizenship. If it is for someone not reasonable to think so, then we this source does not help us at all, because it does not state which citizenship (national or local) it is referring. I add this source to my claim that there exists single citizenship for all lands of Hungarian crown, called Hungarian in Hungary and Croatian-Hungarian outside Hungary. I never advocated that a separate Croatian national citizenship exists, and your subjectivity has led to your misinterpretation of my claim although I stated it clearly multiple times. Asdisis (talk) 12:16, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Again, no Croatian national citizenship. I, and my sources agree with this source perfectly. It is only your subjectivity that led to misinterpretation of my perfectly understandable claim. Tesla had Croatian-Hungarian citizenship which is also called Hungarian citizenship in Hungary. One thing, two names. I think I've been clear, and my sources confirm that claim. Your source have not touched on the matter of local citizenship. Well one has, and I thank you for that, but it did in a way that would need an original research to say that. On the other hand I presented sources that speak specifically about local citizenship. Asdisis (talk) 12:16, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Lastly, this all sources are not talking specifically about national and local citizenship, and we can not use original research to draw conclusions by ourselves. My sources deal with national and local citizenship specifically and no original research has to be done to understand what are they talking about. No one had objected that original research has to be done do understand my sources, only that original research has to be done to specify the claims sources prove to Tesla. I'm involved in a discussion which will determine if that is true, but the sources I presented stand not unchallenged in their claims. I thank to you to your approach to disprove me with sources. That is the right way done in good faith, unlike the presented misconduct of some people in this discussion. Asdisis (talk) 12:16, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

• Is it possible to prevent further trolling and spamming here? 'Local citizenship' is a figment of imagination of some third rated Croatian college teacher.--65.220.39.79 (talk) 12:49, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Not only here but generally in all discussions here and on wikipedia in general. Unfortunately, your sources speak only of national citizenship ,at best, since it is not specified, but a general assumption from the context is rational, if not then the sources are completely useless (but I do not support that stand) thus your claim about local citizenship is unfounded. Also your sources perfectly agree with my sources. However one source is interesting because it specifically talks about local citizenship. The quote "Deputies are chosen according to districts, i.e. every district chooses a deputy. The conditions for the possession of a vote are (a) Hungarian citizenship; (b) the fact of belonging to a Croatian-Slavonian community ...". This quote talks both about local and national citizenship. Note that "local citizenship" is the translation of the term "zavicajnost", which is defined by my sources as "a belonging to certain municipality ( your source says community)". My source is a second hand source and I had used the translation it uses, and that is "local Croatian-Slavonian citizenship". I think you have problems with the word "Croatian" out of subjective reasons, but I hope you are reasonable enough and that you will believe your own sources. I and all the presented sources perfectly agree with this sources you presented, and I hope we will agree as well at the end. Let's resolve this question objectively and it the sources use the "so hated word Croatia" then be it. I am against the what some editors suggests, that to use the word Croatia(n) is by default nationalistic rage, and so on. I have nothing against Croatia, nor Serbia nor any other word the sources use. Asdisis (talk) 13:45, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I disagree with the term "Hungarian province". See the definition of province. The sources mentioning "province" where non-Hungarian sources, without any official or legal declaration, just the author POW was to use the term "province". Croatia in legal terms was never a Hungarian province, not even just an administrative division. It was an autonomous entity, a country that was with personal union with Hungary. I hope I do not have to repeat more. Croatia had it's own administrative divisions, like Lika-Krbava. "Croatia-Slavonia was an autonomous kingdom within the Lands of the Crown of Saint Stephen (Transleithania), the Hungarian part of the dual Austro-Hungarian Empire." -> An AUTONOMOUS KINGDOM, a separate country from Hungarian point of view. 65.220.39.79 -> professional precisity, or nothing. Force citations working from official, legal documents, not individual POWs. Thanks(KIENGIR (talk) 21:02, 2 June 2015 (UTC))

I agree but this is a completely different discussion from Tesla's citizenship. We should not clog the discussion about Tesla's citizenship. Asdisis (talk) 07:54, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Nikola Tesla/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: StudiesWorld (talk · contribs) 11:05, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

2. Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose); and

(c) it contains no original research.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Review

1. Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Undetermined
(b) (MoS)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Undetermined

2. Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Undetermined
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Undetermined
(c) (original research)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Undetermined

3. Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Undetermined
(b) (focused)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Undetermined

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
The reviewer has no notes here.	Undetermined

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
This article is fully stable as it is not undergoing any major changes, edit wars, or content disputes	Pass

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	All images are used legally.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	All images are used appropriately with suitable captions.	Pass

Result

Result	Notes
Undetermined	The reviewer has no notes here.

Discussion

• I am concerned that the nominator is a relatively inexperienced editor who, judging by his edit summary, has little idea of GA requirements and is not one of the main contributors to the article. Main contributors are supposed to be consulted before nominating according to the GA instructions (pinging User:MrX and User:Fountains of Bryn Mawr).

This article is especially problematic in that it has previously been subject to numerous edit wars (over Tesla's nationality for instance), insertion of pseudo-scientific poorly referenced or unreferenced claims about Tesla's abilities and inventions, and all kinds of conspiracy theories. In short, the name of Tesla has entered the realm of urban myth and it is very hard to keep this kind of thing out. It would be wise to consult the regular editors to check whether, in their opinion, there are any lingering issues of this sort. Also, someone needs to be willing to address any issues raised, the last GA simply died through lack of interest. SpinningSpark 23:46, 10 July 2015 (UTC)