Talk:Vojvodinian Academy of Sciences and Art

Of course this article should be merged , precisely the other article should be merged with this one because my article is a better build. I did`t know that this article already exists when i created it - i would just "update" the existing one.iadrian (talk) 23:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

vanu

Hvala na prilogu ali moraju neke stvari da se srede tekst jer si ubacio mnogo pretpostavki(misljenja) koje nemaju sta da traze na clanku jer nisu informacione prirode. Clanak je tu da se ljudi informisu(informacionog karaktera) i da sami stvore svoje misljenje o svemu a ne da im se servira ono sta "trebaju" da misle. Mnoge stvari koje si napisao mogu biti deo diskusije ali ne i samog clanka. Pozdrav iadrian (talk) 19:27, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Хеј здраво..прочитао сам и слажем се делимично са тобом, неким стварима није место у том чланку. Међутим ипак сам додао неке ствари, које мислим да су битне за контроверзе у вези ВАНУ. Погледај уосталом, мислим да ћеш се сложити да је то што сам вратио сасвим на месту. Такође, променио сам у Vojvodinian a не Vojvodian jeр је и Vojvodinian Academy у наслову, а и када расмислиш није Војводиа, па да је Војводиан, већ је Војводина па Војводинијан, и ја сам мислио да је глупо Војводиниан и да треба Војводиан али ево када сам овако поставио ствари паказало се да није.

Naravno. Tu sam ja pogresio, pogledao sam istoriju i tokom jednog edita slucajno sam pogresno iskucao. Pozdrav iadrian (talk) 21:30, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Izvini ali opet si dodao dosta subjektivnog u odeljku contraversy. Pokusaj da zadrzis objektivnost ako zelis da dajes kvalitetne doprinose wikipediji. Zao mi je ali cu morati opet da obrisem neke stvari. Ne razumem sta pokusavas da uradis? Pokusavas da povezes VANU sa autonomasima? Kakve veze imaju manjine sa statutom Vojvodine? Kada u Vojvodini 65% cine Srbi. Ovo nema veze sa politikom, Vojvodina je autonomna pokrajna i treba da ima svoje institucije. To sto ultra-nacionalisti mesaju ideju regionalizacije(decentralizacije) i secezije to nema sta da trazi na clanku o Vojvodini niti o njenoj akademiji. Molim te ubuduce da razgovaramo na Engleskom, ako postoje neki problemi da se rese brzo. iadrian (talk) 12:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Please restrain from inaccurate changes to the article, like minor but important edits, Vojvodina has a capital not an administration center, and there are many sources that supports this that are listed. There is no sense to say "academy in Serbia", it is clear that it is in Serbia since it is an autonomous province. If we say Vojvodina it`s Serbia it`s not France. This is redundant information and it is removed. When wikipedia introduces as one of the "qualities" redundancy the we can say 100 times "In Serbia" :). The point is, there is no reason to say a hundred times the same thing. When we talk about Bavaria it is clear that it is Germany not Spain.. After all we have the main article about Vojvodina that states the autonomous province within Serbia and i think that is clear enough. I don`t understand your pattern here, you have to say it 10 times to fell better :) ? And many other edits that implies unreliable political speculations. Please read the five pillars of wikipedia and be more careful with your contributions. iadrian (talk) 12:58, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

=============================================================================================

Of course it is in Serbia, but why would everyone need to know that, they d be forced to click on Vojvodina in order to see that it is in Serbia. No, you are wrong, it hasn't a capital, it has an administration centre. See for yourself in Vojvodina article, for instance, there are references regarding that issue. I don't recall saying it as many times as you propose I did. I will look into repetition of "in Serbia" and delete any exess mentions.

- If the article says "Vojvodian academy of science and art" it is about Vojvodina not about cherry pies. If you have a problem with some of the information you can check it but not delete just because you don`t like it. Source http://www.vojvodina.gov.rs/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=174&Itemid=83 - "Capital The capital of the Province is Novi Sad. It was founded more than three centuries ago on the left bank of the Danube, by the old road that ran along the Danube. There are 300 000 inhabitants in Novi S ad and its suburban settlements, whereas Novi Sad represents the second largest city in Serbia. ".iadrian (talk) 08:28, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

-THE STATUTE OF THE AUTONOMOUS PROVINCE OF VOJVODINA Capital of the AP of Vojvodina - Article 10 The City of Novi Sad shall be the major administrative centre of the AP of Vojvodina. The seat of the AP of Vojvodina authorities shall be in Novi Sad. The Provincial Assembly decision may establish that the seat of particular provincial bodies be in some other location in the AP of Vojvodina. The status of Novi Sad as the major administrative centre of the AP of Vojvodina, shall be regulated by way of a Provincial Assembly decision, in accordance with the law. http://www.skupstinavojvodine.gov.rs/?s=aktAPV001&j=EN

As you see statute doesnt place NS as a capital but rather as "the major administrative centre". That is what the statute says, you shouldn't care what small polititians like to say and hear on their city's website. Petar Milcic 10:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

- Even the title says "Capital of Vojvodina". And "The status of Novi Sad as the major administrative centre of the AP of Vojvodina, shall be regulated by way of a Provincial Assembly decision, in accordance with the law." And by the new law Novi Sad is the Capital of Vojvodina.This is taken from the official page of the government of the A.P. Vojvodina that is in power now. http://www.vojvodina.gov.rs/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=100&Itemid=68iadrian (talk) 10:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Another thing you ve removed the fact that it "is an academic institution in Serbia, with juristdiction in Vojvodina." under the label "ultra-nationalistic subjectivity". Thats as extreme as it is ignorant. There is nothing Ultra-nationalistic about the fact that SANU is an academic institution in Serbia (including Vojvodina) and that the newly created VANU is also an academic institution, but responsible only for a part of Serbia. I really can't see anything nationalistic, let alone ultra-nationalistic about that fact.

It is important to note that its jurisdiction over Vojvodina is not sole, and it is equally present in the province as SANU.

- It is an ultra-nationalistic remark and inaccurate too. Of course that has jurisdiction in Vojvodina, If the article says "Vojvodian academy of science and art". I think that is clear enough. SANU does not cooperate with VANU and it is NOT under their jurisdiction, it is under the jurisdiction of the government of Vojvodina. SANU and VANU doesn`t have anything in common. I think SANU doesn`t even recognize the existence of VANU. This is another inaccurate information you are trying to put in the article. If there is a reliable reference that says that VANU works with SANU we can add that. SANU and VANU works independent one from another and i don`t thins SANU has any jurisdiction in Vojvodina since the new constitution of Voivodina. reference - http://vanu.org.rs/page.php?21 , it clearly says that it is an independent indtitution that works according to the constitution of Vojvodina, nothing with SANU or some relations wiht SANU of anykind. Please check your data before posting it !!! I can`t go line by line and explaining. For everything in the article there is a reliable refence and you can check them, if fack i would like you to check them, then you would stop with inaccurate edits.iadrian (talk) 08:28, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

You ve misunderstood. Of couse VANU is not under SANU's jurisdiction, I never said that, territory of Vojvodina is. I can see you are repeting an inacurate assumption that can be regarded as very nationalistic, it is not a constitution it is a STATUTE, read it> http://www.skupstinavojvodine.gov.rs/?s=aktAPV001&j=EN, so please remove yourself from these subjective views within this article. "Please check your data before posting it !!! I can`t go line by line and explaining. For everything in the article there is a reliable refence and you can check them, if fack i would like you to check them, then you would stop with inaccurate edits." <same here. Petar Milcic 10:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

-Sanu doesn`t have juridstiction in Vojvodina, VANU is the highest academic institution in the province now. Maybe in the contraversy we can add that SANU should have juridstiction in Voivodina but by the recognition of VANU de facto it doesn`t.iadrian (talk) 10:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

- "Please check your data before posting it !!! I can`t go line by line and explaining. For everything in the article there is a reliable refence and you can check them, if fack i would like you to check them, then you would stop with inaccurate edits." <same here. - this is becoming childish, i don`t have time to explain to every person what are the laws of government of Voivodina. The last thing i would like to say is for you to check the official page of the government of Voivodina for the updates about the STATUS of the autonomous province of Voivodina. iadrian (talk) 11:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Also,

"Since it was de jure illegal during the first six years of its existence, it was formed as a group of citizens, with its proponents awaiting its legal recognition. Its main proponents consist of reginal parties with the views on Vojvodinian autonomy identical to radical Autonomaši - Autonomists (Serbian: Аутономаши) (who advocate eventual seccession from the rest of Serbia - Nenad Canak's LSV, among others) and Hungarian regional parties (totaling in less then 20% of voters in Vojvodina and 5% in all of Serbia). When the new Statute of Vojvodina (a compromise between Hungarian and Autonomist parties with the rest of ruling parties) was passed on December 15, 2009, VANU de jure became a legal academic institution."

-This is inaccurate too, this is the article of Voivodian academy not about independence of Voivodina. If you look it like that, all minorities and the Serb majority voted for the democratic party that promised the new constitution of Voivodina, in fact, that was one of the reasons that DS kicked radical and other ultra-nationalistic parties from Voivodina, but this is politics and it has nothing to do with the Academy of Voivodina. If you really want to add this you can make a new article about that. Don`t mix politics with culture. Imagine that i add all the threats and ignorance of SANU about VANU on the SANU page? PS it is also an ultra-nationalistic speculation certainly not a reference of some kind. iadrian (talk) 08:33, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-nationalist#Ultra-nationalism Pleas read this before using "ultra-nationalistic" again. "When nationalism is pushed to an extreme, it not only justifies wars against other nations, as in the German invasion of Poland at the beginning of World War II, but it is also used to justify attacks against ones fellow citizens, as in the Nazi assertion that Jews are not really citizens." Please dont go Godwin, its a ridiculous argument. No it is not, but, as I said and we both know, it was illegal as an academic institution for the first six years. That has nothing to do with alleged indipendence of Vojvodina. It is clear that you are pushing this argument in that direction. Yes, Serbs are the majority, that doesn't disprove anything above, doesn't it? Vojvodinian academy is established with controversy, some is political, some national, thats why it is all under "Controvercy" section. Petar Milcic 10:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

- Again don`t mix politics with culture or SANU`s page could be full with contraversy.iadrian (talk) 10:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Those are all facts, and are crutial events preceeding and influencing the legislative formation of VANU. If the voter count was different, we both know that VANU would be either non-existent or perhaps defined as the only legal academic institution in the province. That is why the votes count.

- These are speculations and an autonomous province should have it`s institutions and we both know that. See other autonomous provinces in Europe... I don`t care if ultra-nationalists don`t understand the difference about decentralization and secesion. These are all speculations.iadrian (talk) 08:33, 3 February 2010 (UTC) I really dont see why are you hurling at Godwin's rule already, with that "ultranationalistic" misinformation.

- There is an interesting acticle on the official page of government of Voivodina, Get Acquainted with Vojvodina, you should read it. It is avaliable in Serbian language too. http://www.vojvodina.gov.rs/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=174&Itemid=83 iadrian (talk) 09:48, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

PS: Just went through the article and "in Serbia" is mentioned only two times, and the second is to clarify wether it is opposition in Vojvodina or in the whole of Serbia. Zelja87 (talk • contribs) 22:25, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

- You yourself said that Voivodina should not have it`s own institutions which is wrong and that says a lot about you. There isn`t a autonomous province in the world that hasn`t have it`s own institutions anything otherwise is wrong. If you don`t understand how autonomous provinces works then you should stop editing articles about Voivodina. Ok. If it really means for you, ok, but you igored the rest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iadrian yu (talk • contribs) 08:10, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

And please sign your messages with four ~. iadrian (talk) 08:40, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

No, I did not, you just read yourown post (that an AP shouldn't have its institutions), thats rediculous, it already had, even before the new statute. Where did I said that, pleas remind me? Stop using use misinformation, please. Again, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-nationalist#Ultra-nationalism < seriously, read this. Why do you continue to insult me with this U-N suff?? Sorry, what did I ignore? Petar Milcic 10:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I apologize if i insulted you in any way, but you must understand the rules of wikipedia. Imagine if every new user takes to edit articles by their likings? What would wikipedia become :). You ignore all the sources and references presented on this article and change data to your likings. Please stop doing this or you will be reported to the administrator. I will try to invite a third side to settle this problem. Maybe it is my fault, i don`t know, therefore i will invite a third person or an administrator to solve our problem.iadrian (talk) 10:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)