Talk:Spodnja Šiška

Slovenia Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Slovenia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Slovenia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SloveniaWikipedia:WikiProject SloveniaTemplate:WikiProject SloveniaSlovenia articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Slovenia to-do list:

Here are some tasks you can do (watch):

Requests: , Protestant Reformation in the Slovene Lands (sl), Metlika black (sl)
Wikify: Russia–Slovenia relations
Unreferenced: Inner Carniola, Litostroj, Pavel Golia, Predjama Castle
Cleanup: Edvard Ravnikar, Škofja Loka, Inex-Adria Aviopromet Flight 1308
Expand: Education in Slovenia
Stubs: Ajdovi žganci, Čop Street, Radenska
NPOV: Gregorij Rožman, Siddharta (band)
Portal maintenance: Update News, Did you know, announcements, and suggest Selected article and picture
Help assess the quality of 35 unassessed articles
Take/Add requested photographs

Traditional region

Regarding whether Spodnja Šiška is part of the traditional region of Upper Carniola, there seems to be a misunderstanding about what exactly does 'traditional region' denote and what is the extent of Upper Carniola. Per my view, it means the region as traditionally understood by the people living there and should not be confused with 'historical region'. A recent article clearly explains and shows that Spodnja Šiška is outside of what people understand as Upper Carniola.[1] For this reason, citing articles from pre 20th-century in support of the opposing view seems off the mark. --TadejM ^{my talk} 03:23, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All of the WP articles use the standard (historical) definitions of Slovenia's traditional regions; for example, Slovenj Gradec is part of the traditional region of Styria (not Carinthia), Brežice is part of the traditional region of Styria (not Lower Carniola), and Zgornje Jezersko is part of the traditional region of Carinthia (not Upper Carniola). Modern survey-based opinions about where traditional regions start and end are vague and change over time, and they are also confused with popular regions (e.g., Prlekija, etc.) that are not among the standard traditional regions. I've added a footnote to the article to address this concern. Doremo (talk) 03:36, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no historically accepted definition of what constitutes a traditional region in Slovenia. An expert using field research to define the borders as to what people understand them to be is a semi-quantitative method and is much more relevant than citing pre 20th-century sources and drawing original inferences from that. As to the claim that 'other such articles exist', it is a fallacy of pointing to another wrong. The note that you have added is also original research and does not follow from the cited source. --TadejM ^{my talk} 04:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear that Slovenia's traditional regions are based on the Habsburg crown lands, and it is clear that popular conceptions today of where one traditional region transitions to another vary from person to person and also from the traditional understanding (and will probably continue to change). Citing sources plainly indicating that (Spodnja) Šiška is in Upper Carniola involves no inferences. I see nothing wrong with the note about the survey-based research. Doremo (talk) 04:27, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Among the3 sources you have added, I can't find any stating that in 2024, Spodnja Šiška is part of Upper Carniola, or that it is part of Upper Carniola in any case. You have even added sources from the 18th century, while historically, Upper Carniola did not even exist as such. This is clear original inference. On the other hand, we have a reliable source with a map showing that Spodnja Šiška is not part of Upper Carniola. In Wikipedia, we follow reliable sources such as articles published in scientific journals and not made-up evaluations of historical documents. --TadejM ^{my talk} 04:38, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't understand the objection. Good historical sources spanning from 1797 to 1862 indicate that Spodnja Šiška is part of Upper Carniola. The 2017 article indicates that today's popular conceptions of the borders of traditional regions often differ from the historical perspective. Both of these facts are clearly presented in the article. Doremo (talk) 04:55, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The historical Upper Carniola (Kreis) ceased to exist in the 1860s. The sources providing subdivision by traditional regions today don't strictly follow the pre-20th cent. administrative borders. Things have changed in Slovenia since then for various reasons (demographic changes, political influences). In general usage, as is clearly explained, the denotations of these regions have changed. Therefore, I strongly consider that we should follow the 2017 source and only mention the historical position in the history section or as a footnote. Doing otherwise disregards the current understanding of these names (both by recent sources and the general public) and puts undue weight on the historical position. Today, Ljubljana is in general not considered to be part of Upper Carniola. --TadejM ^{my talk} 08:08, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are suggesting that Wikipedia should not use (let's call them) Austro-Hungarian-based traditional regions, but should instead use (let's call them) Geršič-survey-based traditional regions (including the addition of "Central Slovenia" as a traditional region), then this proposal affects hundreds of articles, and it should be discussed at WikiProject Slovenia rather than at this article. Doremo (talk) 09:46, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will take it there. The view that we should follow the borders as they existed in the 18th century in citing traditional regions is not supported by modern sources. The authors recognise the importance of more recent historical events (such as the Rapallo border in the Littoral) and put much emphasis on the self-identification of the local inhabitants. Besides Geršič in [2] and Geršič and Perko in [3], the same is claimed e.g. by Golec in [4]: "To this day, almost 170 years after the abolition of the districts, it is not only Notranjska that has been territorially reduced, but all three provinces based on the former districts, including Gorenjska and Dolenjska, have been reduced at their edges. Most noticeably, no one counts Ljubljana, the political centre of the Gorenjska district, as part of Gorenjska, and the inhabitants of Bela Krajina never wanted to be Dolenjska because of their geographical location and different dialect." --TadejM ^{my talk} 13:51, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]