Talk:Dalmatian Italians/Archives/2007/December

ANOTHER CROATIAN ATTACK

Here we are again with the same stuff. The Croatian nationalists (Kubura, Zenanarh, Direktor, Raguseo and others) now create another problem: they are not able to understand that the Dalmatian Italians are NOT necessarily Italians. Unbelievable. Now they cannot understand that a foreign surname in a big western country (like Italy, France, England, ecc..ecc..) not necessarily means a foreigner to that country. May be with small counties like Croatia this can happen, but when we remember Disraeli as british prime minister or Hugo in France or Skorzeny in Germany or Oberdan in Italy, we all realize that there is nothing strange if the croat Grubelic is a dalmatian Italian. But they want anyway that those dalmatian italian be declared italian by themselves. Unbelievable. This is typical Balkan mentality, the same mentality that creates ethnic wars even in our days! Anyway this is another matter that every admin can easily explain: the article is about Dalmatian Italians and not Italians in Dalmatia! But the nationalist Croats want another unbelievable problem. So now, as I wrote before, want another problem even with "merger", after they DEFEAT in "Cancel" and "move". They will never stop, because nationalism is illogical. WARNING: they want a final BLOCK of the article by some admin!!.--Cherso 18:54, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

The real problem is that you have an article about ethno-term "Dalmatian Italians" connected to anything back to the stone ages in Dalmatia if it's possible. Speakers of Dalmatian language in Dalmatia were not Italians, Croats were not Italians, Dalmatian Italians were 19th century descendents of Italians who came to Dalmatia mostly from 16th to 18th century. Zenanarh 19:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

What has to do your comment on the stone age with the simple fact that "the article is about Dalmatian Italians and not Italians in Dalmatia"? You, Zenanarth, write in a "bizantine" style! In plain english: the article is about the dalmatian italians of the last two centuries, when the age of nationalism developed in Europe, and is about the actual associations of the dalmatian italians (Croatian or Italian or Australian or whatever).--Cherso 20:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry but I must laugh. If someone is not an Italian what the hell is his or hers name doing on the page listing Italians?!!? Anyway you wrote a lot and in the end saying nothing. You need to post sources which will confirm these people as Italians, until you do they have no place on this page. As for the merger I propposed it because we have two almost identical articles talking about the same thing. I wonder what is the reason for that? Wouldn't it be better if it was all in one article? In the end I also must ask: Is that you Giovanni? --Raguseo 23:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Cherso/ Giovanni on this one. A Croatian surname might signify Croatian roots (at least in most cases?), but that is not the point. There are many Italians in Italy and abroad with Croatian surnames. I personally know dozens, and they all hold Italian citizenship, carry Italian passports, and self-identify as Italian. To eliminate Italian Dalmatians from the list based on surname only is without merit. Having said that, however, this is an unecessary list and should probably be tigtened up to three or four individuals of note.Mariokempes 00:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you actually understand what exactly is the problem here. I don't have nothing against people with Croatian surnames identifiying as Italians and people with Italian surnames identifying as Croats. I have something against listing people who are not Italians as Italians (I would do the same if you would list Italians as Croats). That is main problem here. Grubelić and Lalić are not Italians, they are Croats. Also if Cherso is Giovanni that would a breach of his block, he is currently blocked for a week. --Raguseo 00:18, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

If those listed do not self-identify as Italians you are correct. On this I cannot comment. Your comments above suggest they were removed solely on the basis of their last name- and this would be incorrect. Having said that, I still think the list is too forced and should be edited with people of note. No comment on Cherso/Giovanni... but the timing is quite the coincidence. Mariokempes 00:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

You are mistaken, I made no comments about these people's surnames. I also only removed people who are not Italians regardless of what their last names are. --Raguseo 00:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

You are right and I apologize. It was actually Direktor that made the suggestions. Cheers, Mariokempes 01:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I am starting to understand Giovanni Giove with his complaints against this nationalistic group of Croats. The article is about the Dalmatian Italians and they can be Croats or Italians or whatever, like the French Parisiennes can be French or Polish or whatever and the Bavarian Germans can be Germans or Portuguese or whatever. It is very simple: the actual president of France has a Slav surname but is French, like Villani and Grubelic are Croats but are even Dalmatian Italians (the second with a croat surname while the first with an italian surname). You nationalistic Croats always try to create problems in everything:the article is about Dalmatian Italians and not Italians in Dalmatia!. And the Dalmatian Italians can have a Croat passport (like Grubelic and Villani) or an Italian passport, like me (born in Cherso and now exiled away from my beloved Dalmatia).--Cherso 15:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Would you be so kind and explain us the difference between the so called Dalmatian Italians and Italians in Dalmatia? And also how can Croats or any other ethnic people be Italians if they are already Croats or something else. That just doesn't make sense. Your examples also doesn't have any sense. A non-German person can never be German because this person already has an established identity, a non-German identity. Your example would apply only if you would speak about regional identity and then you could say: Dalmatians, Parisians, Bavarians. When you are put an ethnic designation before these regional identities you are making a mistake. Besides by that example you gave all Dalmatians would then actually be Croatian. --Raguseo 17:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

For the last time: The article "Dalmatian Italians" is about an ethnic group of contemporary Croatia. They are the equivalent in Croatia of the Ligurian Italians in Italy or of the German Italians in Italian South Tyrol/Alto Adige. Many South-Tyrolians have Italian surnames and are considered part of the german-speaking community of the Italian South Tyrol. The former boss of the SVP (South Tyrolen Volkspartey) has an Italian surname.--Cherso 18:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Is Dalmatia part of Italy? No it is not. You act as if it is. Both Liguria and South Tyrol are part of Italy and if you haven't noticed Dalmatia is a not. Now wheter you call it Dalmatian Italians or Italians in Dalmatia you are talking about a small minority group in another country. Most Dalmatians (above 90%) are Croats so it is Croats who are synonomous with Dalmatia not Italians. --Raguseo 18:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

What the heck has to do the fact that Dalmatia is part of Italy or not with the article? The Croat POV is pure nonsense. My name is Ferdinand Buxo and I am a member of the Catalonian community in southern France. I consider myself French but even an ethnic "Catalonian French" and nobody forces me to deny to be a Catalonian french because my family name is French. F.B. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.77.23.98 (talk) 21:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Cherso/Giovanni: "...Dalmatian Italians are NOT necessarily Italians."

Good one, Giovanni. What you fail to realise is that they do have to consider themselves Italian to be part of the Dalmatian Italian minority. According to you we are all really Italians, we just don't know it (yet). DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 11:48, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

It has everything to with it. The example given in previous message was that people in Liguria and South Tyrol are Italians regardless of their ethnicity. That is true since we can apply citizenship criteria and call all citizens who live there Italian citizens or shorter Italians, even if ethnically they are not Italians. Dalmatia on the other hand is not in Italy, it is in Croatia so if we apply this method to Dalmatia people there can only be Croatian. When you talk about Dalmatian Italians you are in fact talking about Italians in Dalmatia. Get it? --Raguseo 14:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Ferdinand Buxo: you are totally right. My nepiew lives in Cherso, has a "croat" surname ending in "c", belongs to the local dalmatian italian association of Lussino and so considers himself A DALMATIAN ITALIAN, but has a Croat passport and identifies himself as a Croatian. He usually calls himself a 'Croatian with Dalmatian Italian ethnicity'. Why the same group of Croats (Kubura, Zenanarh, ecc..ecc..) keep creating problems about everything Dalmatian Italian in Wikipedia? The only explication is that they want to erase even the MEMORY of we Dalmatian Italians after having cleansed our ethnic minority in coastal Dalmatia.--Cherso (talk) 05:26, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, look: to be a "Dalmatian Italian", the guy has to be part of the Italian minority in Dalmatia. If the guy stated he is officially a Croat, then he is officially a Croat, that's all. FFS, are you SO irrational that you can't see that someone needs to be part of a minority to be part of a minority! When I say "consider himself", I mean what does he write down in his documents: Italian, or Croatian (or Montenegrin). --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 21:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

No, he is a Croat but belongs to the Dalmatian Italian Ethnic group, like the German Alsatians are French but belong to the German Alsatian ethnic group and the South Tyroleans are Italians (like their former boss Magnagus, who has an Italian surname) but belong to the German Italian ethnic group. The problem with you Croat is that you still have not reached the cultural political maturity (of western Europe) to understand this simple reality, because of your Balkan mentality with the hate and wars related.--Cherso (talk) 03:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

You should know the difference between Croatian and Croat.
Croatian is any citizen of Croatia, and it can be of any nationality.
Croat is a person of Croat nationality, no matter where he lives.
Problem with your attitude is - "Dalmatian Italian". There's no reason for such article; some other intentions are hidden behind this name. You may fool foreigners, but here we know very well for your game. This article should be part of article "Italians in Croatia". Simply, there's no need for this, these are nothing special. Like Croats in Lombardy, or Croats in Furlany. These all belong to article "Croats in Italy".
I don't know why do you think that western Europe is culturally and politically above central and eastern Europe.
As I know, western Europe produced fascism, nazism, racist theories, hooliganism, AIDS, colonialism... It enslaved small peoples in whole world, destroyed indigenous cultures, killed or forcefully deported natives, it kept the slave trade till 19th century.
Biggest warmongers were our neighbours from West, as well as Ottoman invaders from East. These brought the bloodiest wars here.
Balkans gave ancient Greek culture, whose flourishing was ended by occupators from west.
Small Balkanic nations had developed their own letter systems since early Middle Ages.
Small nation of Croats and their Croat language had a bunch of grammars and dictionaries till the Age of National Awakenings (19th c.); it had its own laws and statutes in its mother tongue (Poljički štatut in Poljica, Vinodolski zakonik in Vinodol, Istarski razvod in Istria), wrote by Croats themselves.
The literature in Croat language was flourishing in the times of renaissance, so you're not dealing with a bunch of illiterate savages. Kubura (talk) 10:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Another who wanted a "balanced" article is gone

Even MarioKempes -who wanted a balanced article- is gone, as he writes above:<Your perspective on this is very limited and the "Dalmatian Englishman" analogy is testimony of this. I'm not about to start another pointless thread of discussion here, and I really have no interest in this article other than trying to keep it balanced. To be honest, I don't think it gets much traffic other than you three or four zealots. I'm gone... good bye. Mariokempes (talk) 18:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)> The group of Croatian nationalists (Kubura, ZenanarTh, ecc...) got what they want - mainly after the lynching/ban of Giovanni Giove by admins too much friendly to them - and now they aim to have free hands to do whatever they want with the articles about Dalmatia, like this one on Dalmatian Italians. I will monitor every Croatian nationalistic post of these zealots for future referral and complaint to the top wiki authorities. Be sure of that, "dear" fanatic Croats.--Cherso (talk) 03:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Cherso, what you call "balance" is a perpetual edit-war between people who actually live in Dalmatia and highly biased Italian emmigrants ("exiles"). --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 20:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Cherso, what's with the sudden fondness for Mariokempes anyway? Not long ago, namely on 9 November, scroll up a bit to have a look, he was saying things like "I agree with Cherso/Giovanni on this one" and "No comment on Cherso/Giovanni... but the timing is quite the coincidence", comments which usually send you straight to the caps lock button on your keyboard for a bit more yelling. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 10:03, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Following your debate: "Dalmatian Italians"

I was following your (emotional) debate. I found a new Croatian research article written, by Mirko Đinđić, from the Croatian Political Science Review (03/2007). Its (translated) title is "Identity 'Conflict' of Dalmatian Italians", for a summary see here. At least, it seems that the term "Dalmatian Italians" is properly used. --DaQuirin (talk) 19:06, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

DaQuirin, take a look better [1].
English translation is misleading here.
In Croatian original, it says identitetski lomovi dalmatinskih Talijana.
The adjective "Dalmatian" is written with small letters (dalmatinskih), while "Italians" is written with capital letters.
In Croatian, it's a grammar rule to write the names of nations, peoples, tribes, inhabitants of a island, region, planet, peninsula, city, village.... with capital letters. Like Kinez, Rom, Komanč, Marsovac, Sicilijanac...= Chinese, Roma, Comanche, Martian, Sicilian....
If there's a part of certain nation, living in some area, and it's not so "special", than the adjective is written with small letters: lombardijski Hrvati (Lombardian Croats), bosanski Hrvati (Bosnian Croats), jorkširski Indijci (Yorhshire Indians), bavarski Turci (Bavarian Turks), saski Kurdi (Saxonian Kurds) etc.. As you see, here Croatian and English differ.
But, if that community has something more special, than it's being written with capital letters: Moravski Hrvati (Moravian Croats), Gradišćanski Hrvati (Burgenland Croats), Moliški Hrvati (Molise Croats), Lužički Srbi (Lusatian Sorbs).
"Dalmatian Italians" belong to the same group as Bavarian Turks, Saxonian Kurds, Thuringian Poles, Cantuarian Pakistanis, Lancastrian Afghanis, Lombardian Croats, etc.
Lombardian Croats are nothing special, nor Dalmatian Italians nor Cantuarian Pakistanis nor Bavarian Turks. They all belong to articles Croats in Italy, Italians in Croatia, Pakistanis in England, Turks in Germany, respectively. If we overlook that, than we must read (again) WP:NOT.
DaQuirin, maybe you're not familiar with Italian irredentism and their dirty games with evading of mentioning of Dalmatia in Croatian context and denying of existence of Croatian culture and Croats in Dalmatia (and generally on Eastern Adriatic). Kubura (talk) 15:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your interesting comment. But the summary of the mentioned article makes it clear that your comparisons (Lombardian Croats and the like) are misleading. Are you seriously offering a better translation than the Croatian Political Science Review – well... I really don't see your point in this. --DaQuirin (talk) 22:42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)