User talk:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

You have too many edits in talk namespace and no edits in main article namespace.

If you continue to behave like this, people might begin to think of you as of troll.

--Ante Perkovic (talk) 16:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing that,:)), isn't it so obvious? Actually I put some edits lately in the main article space of "Magazin', if that's what you mean. Still not ready though, to edit new articles. When I am ready, I'll start with some minor articles at SerboCroatian and English Wikipedia. Greetings. (talk) 23:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

New Yugoslavia[edit]


Your input in Talk:Yugoslavia has been removed. Sorry but Wikipedia is not a place for petitions. However you're welcome to write a section in Yugoslavia or a new article New Yugoslavia.

Best regards,
Kpjas (talk) 05:40, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

That's ok, and thanks for the idea; greetings. (talk) 16:43, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Your edits[edit]


It seems you are a new user on the English Wikipedia so as an old-timer I'd like to leave you here a few comments.

You're welcome to write content of Wikipedia.

Please treat articles' Talk pages as a space for discussion how we can make the article in question better and for exchange of views about the subject with other users that can later be reflected in the article's content.

Please assume good faith, be civil and respect other users. The project cannot tolerate disruptive or inflammatory behaviour. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt but other admins might not be as tolerant and you may be blocked for a specified period of time.

Feel free to ask me for help or clarifications about Wikipedia but I firmly refuse to take part in your disputes with other users.

Best regards,
Kpjas (talk) 07:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Central South Slavic languages[edit]


Thank you for your inquiry at my User talk page. This is not a role of administrator to engage in disputes over content (especially if he/she has almost no knowledge of the subject like me in this case). My advice would be to discuss this point in the relevant Talk page with other users who are knowledgeable and care about the subject (if you meet with opposition to your bold edits of the article in question.

The page for discussion is Template talk:South Slavic languages sidebar and I see that User:Ivan Štambuk has made the change so I think you should probably discuss this matter with him.

Kpjas (talk) 07:17, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

P.S Please provide a link or a diff when mentioning a page or a specific edit, thank you.

Your edits (2)[edit]


You may be aware that another user complained about your edits. I believe in maintaining good atmosphere and friendly cooperation, and it seems to me that your discussions are in conflict with these values.

Please note that Wikipedia is not a discussion forum and a place to voice your dissatisfaction with something. Please contribute content that is based on reliable, mainstream sources.

You should regard this note as a warning that you may be blocked for a specified period of time. Not as a punishment for your comments but because the overall result of your contribution to Wikipedia doesn't seem to be positive.

Kpjas (talk) 22:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


Stop x nuvola with clock.svg
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for Attacking other users and incivility. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Kpjas (talk) 17:15, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Aggravating behaviour[edit]


Please refrain from such aggravating behaviour as [1]Kpjas (talk) 06:53, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Serbo-Croatian, some news travel shortly[edit]

Po genetskim kriterijima Matasović slavenske jezike razvrstava drugačije nego što je do sada u slavistici bilo uobičajeno, revidirajući njihovu tradicionalnu podjelu na istočne, zapadne i južne. Za razumijevanje položaja hrvatskoga jezika među slavenskima važni su njegovi poredbenopovijesni argumenti navedeni u odjeljku pod naslovom Južnoslavenski jezici i problem »srednjojužnoslavenskoga«. Budući da se za cijelo južnoslavensko područje ne mogu utvrditi zajedničke inovacije, kao potvrda njegova genetskog jedinstva, to je još manje moguće za »srednjojužnoslavenski« jezični kompleks. Po Matasoviću, »srednjojužnoslavenski« može biti »samo konvencionalan naziv za skupinu dijalekata između slovenskoga i bugarsko-makedonskoga« (umjesto politički nekorektnoga dosadašnjeg naziva »hrvatskosrpski« ili »srpskohrvatski«), ali nipošto ne može figurirati i kao »termin koji ima genetskolingvistički smisao«, tj. iz njega se ne može valjano zaključivati da su jezici koje »pokriva« (hrvatski, srpski, bošnjački, crnogorski) potekli iz istoga prajezika i da su genetski jedinstveni, a još je manje opravdano tvrditi da ih to određuje kao jedinstven književni jezik (kojim govore Hrvati, Srbi, Bošnjaci i Crnogorci).

  • I have and will continue removing all your deliberate lies (Marulić and Kašić "never calling their language Croatian"), disinformations (Brozović and Pranjković never claimed that so-called CSS is a genetic node) and trollings from talk pages. That you cannot cope with cognitive dissonance resulting from the fact that Tito's Communist Party no longer dictates what history and linguistic handbooks ought to propagate, is yours and yours problem only. Unless you have a verifiable source claiming otherwise or refuting the aforementioned quote by a world-class linguist, spare us of trouble wasting time on seeking to block you for repeated trolling and personal attacks. Cheers --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 23:05, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

And who can be sure that your 'sorce'-Matasovic is a linguist comparable to the world-class linguists like Brozovic and Pranjkovic. He is FAR from being a 'world-class' linguist and can write anything that your 'today's Tito', i.e. HDZ propaganda dictates him to write. What he is saying doesn't have much in common with the factual state of the things. And, by the way, - isn't it INTERESTING, how one linguist whose main interest are Indo-European studies and Celtic languages,- SUDDENLY 'decides to write' about South Slavic languages??? Seems like your "HDZ-Tito" and its handbooks full with quazi-theories is quite strong these days, ha? But it won't be for long. Here's a source that comes from a world-class croatian linguist, Dr. Ivo Pranjkovic, again, which says it all: In most linguistical aspects Serbian and Croatian are ONE language, and it should be said CLEARLY and LOUD! The article says it clearly and with facts. Anything else is just someone's wishful dream. And at the end, if the administrators at wikipedia really allow your pathetic vandalisms -to erase valid opinions on the discussion pages, than it is not OK. Maybe this time you've won a small battle, but the war for the truth is not over, and I am sure all scientific, normal and civilized world will make sure you're losing it. Bye and Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:44, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Because he's the only real Croatian Indo-Europeanist, whose knowledge of comparative and historical linguistics surpasses that of Brozović and Pranjković by leaps and bounds. Moreover, in about dozen pages where he discusses the issue of so-called "Central south Slavic", he cites numerous sources that agree with him. If you don't "trust" him, maybe you can try another historical grammar, written by an Austrian Slavist (It has "Croatian" in the title, so it must have been "cro-nationalist propaganda", right? :):
Historische Grammatik des Kroatischen : Einleitung und Lautgeschichte der Standardsprache / Georg Holzer. - Frankfurt am Main [etc.] : Peter Lang, 2007
Both of these are probably much too advance for non-specialists, so you wouldn't understand much, but that's your problem, WP does not care what people "think" or "imagine" to be truth, there is only what verifiable sources claim.
Also, Pranjković and Brozović never claimed or proved the existence of so called "CSS" as a genetic node. Brozović just used the term to substitute the Serbo-Croatian anachronism, and as for the Pranjković's quote, that you repeatedly use and abuse on talk pages, it referrs to subdialectal basis for standard languages, nothing else, no mention being made of Čakavian, Kajkavian and/or Torlakian. (Na standardološkoj razini..). But you cannot distinguish these two concept, can you, let alone to conceive a greater historical perspective which puts Croatian much aside from Serbian (or these newly-invented Bosniak and Montenegrin) That is your problem dude. Croatian literature is 9 centuries only, three-dialectal, Croats had more grammars and dictionaries before the 19th century than Serbs have after the 19th century [as there is practically no Serbian vernacular literature before 19th century].
Administrators (well, at least some, too many teenagers with sysops flags around here with heave anti-elitism attitude) are here just to protect the WP content, and the process of establishing the consensus, not to take sides in the discussions, or "threat" those with opposing opinions. Most importantly, most of them have very little patience for IP addresses that have being leaving disruptive comments on the talkpages for years, with 0 edits in the mainspace, but I see you've already discovered that, and judging from the way you continue to "discuss", you'll soon again will :) --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 11:07, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

You're just repeating something that only you and your 'real croatian Indoeuropeanist' support. The majority of linguists and ordinary people think differently. And about the '9 centuries of croatian literature', ha, ha, nobody will buy that one. As my friend told tou recently in the comment that you erased, the writers and linguists started mentioning 'croatian' language in late 19 th century, by the directive of the Austrian officials. Before that it was called mostly ILIRIAN language and ILIRIAN literature, and if you didn't know (:P), ILIRIAN means YUGOSLAVIAN, or SOUTH SLAVIC. The live proof of this are today's Molise Slavs, who (if we put asside the eager cro-propaganda to make them 'Croats'),still call themselves SLAVS. They left Dalmatia before the croatian nationalism poisoned their areas, and they are an example how would today's people in Dalmatia feel nationally if there wasn't for the cro-nationalism, which spread in their areas in late 19th century. These are the facts, dude, ind if you have problems with the truth, that's your problem. The truth will only stay as it is, no matter that someone eagerly but in vain tries to misinterpret it. Bye. (talk) 17:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, you and your friend are completely wrong. All linguistis (Slavists) divide South Slavic branch into West and East South Slavic. The last common ancestor that is reconstructible by comparative method for all Croatian dialects is Proto-West-South Slavic. I can cite you plenty (in fact, all that I've managed to glance on) Slavic comparative handbooks that tell you so, and you haven't answered to my claim to provide evidence that claims otherwise. What are the exclusive common isoglosses for this "Proto-Serbo-Croatian" quasi-language, that encompass all Croatian, Bosnian and Serbian dialects, but leave Slovenian aside? There are none, dude.
9 centuries of Croatian literature is a fact, my dear friend. Croatian Renaissance and Baroque works are the pinnacle of literary production in all Slavic languages of the period. It has been too long and too strong incorporated into "Serbo-Croatian" matrix. Old Dubrovnik writers never called their language "Serbian", and the longing for days when Gundulić, Vetranović, Palmotić and co. could be studied as a part of some "Yugoslav literature" can even today be evident in some WP editors here. Fortunately they left as abundant attestation of Croat ethnicon, and pervaded their works with lexemes that are of exclusive Croatian provenience (e.g. Čakavisms, Catholicism, exchanging and basing their works on writings of writers of Zadar, Split, Šibenik etc.).
Your ignorant friend claimed that Marulić and Kašić "never called their language Croatian", which is wrong. Perhaps in Yugoslav times Communists censored it, but today in high school kids when reading Marulić's Judita they do read u versih harvacki složena ("arranged in Croatian verses") on the cover page. Here is a facsimile copy of the editio princeps (Venice, 1521): [3]. Do you see that "uersih haruacchi"? :) There are plenty of attestions of Croatian language and Croat ethnicon in the work itself, as well is in other Marulić's works.
As for the Illyrian - it exclusively meant Croat, up until the the 19th century and the Illyrian movement when the term Illyrian meant entire South Slavdom. In all dictionaries and glosses 16th-19th century Illyrian is defined as synonymous with Croatian. Never "Serbian". E.g. from Jakov Mikalja's dictionary Blago jezika slovinskoga (Dubrovnik, 1649):
hrrivat, Hervat; Croata; Illyricus, i. Croata; ae
hrrivacia, Hervatska zemglja; Croatia; Illyris, dis. Illyricum, ci, Croatia; ae
And ending with pre-Illyrian-movement, Joakim Stulli's, Lexicon latino-italico-illyricum (Dubrovnik-Budim, 1801):
Illyrice - Slovinski, harvatski, hrovatski, horvatski
Why is that so? You can educate your self from e.g. this masterfully written and not-so-longish paper, which has plenty of inline quotations and references to satisfy your potential suspicion. If you can't read Croatian, try e.g. this English work that also deals with the Illyrian "issue", but is much longer.
Molise Slavs call their own language naški ("ours language"), but have accepted incorporation into Croatian linguistic and cultural matrix. They speak Ikavian Štokavian idiom [which is spoken exclusively by Croats, not Serbs], with millions of Čakavisms in it. Try reading some texts on --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 20:27, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but you are wrong again about me and my friend. Seems like you’re spending too much of your time searching for ‘sources’ of your points of views ,valid or non-valid, but that is something that I cannot do now, so I didn’t do any research on internet to confirm my stands, although I am sure if I did, I’d have found enough sources to disprove yours. From your writings it’s clear that you hate anything connected to Serbs and Serbia, also you are trying to minimize or ignore everything good that was achieved together in Yugoslavia’s era, to deny the obvious factual unity of the Serbo-Croatian language (based on the same:-Neo-Shtokavian dialect), and all that is a sufficient factor to think of you as a cro-nationalist, which, in fact you’ve never denied. Also, as expected, you avoid mentioning the huge differences in the ‘dialects’ (or better-languages) of what is called ‘Croatian language’, and the fact that people from Dalmatia cannot understand someone from the Croatian north who speaks ‘kajkavian’ etc. I am sure you’d have your own ‘explanation’ for this too, but believe me, it’d probaly be nothing but a nonsense that someone might laugh at. To be honest, Ivan, I am not a big fan of the Serbs neither, but I respect the truth and hate those who intentionally misinterpret or hide it for some political reasons. I see that you are also an educated and (so far) well behaved dude, but ignoring some important facts about our common Central South Slavic language and also minimizing some positive things and connections that were and are (now again) present between our South Slavic nations doesn’t fit you much. I respect your national feeling as a Croat, but your scientific focus should be wider than the national cause, or at least to the level of commonly accepted scientific facts, which your nationalistic orientation cannot change. Anyway, keeping history and literature aside and going by the actual state in Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia&Hercegovina and Montenegro, A FACT IS that today the people in those countries speak one language with a few variants of it. They understand each other with no problems, even much better than a German Bavarian can understand a German Prussian. The re-connecting process of our same speaking nations is more and more obvious in many areas, which is, you like it or not, a very good thing. The latest big triumphal show ‘Operacija Trijumf’ in which singers from Serbian/Croatian/Bosnian speaking area compete for a best singer is a crown of the successfully renewed relations. The speakers and the jury in the show are from Zagreb, Sarajevo and Belgrade, and everybody is speaking his variant of the common language and everybody understands everybody very well. As for me reading Croatian, ha, ha, yes, Ivan, I can read Croatian, because it’s almost IDENTICAL to Serbian, or better said -‘Ekavian’, which was the second language I learned as a kid, mostly reading the comics ‘Zagor’ and ‘Marti Misterija’). You might say whatever you want to my facts above, but those are the facts and nothing and nobody can change them. I don’t mind discussing more with you about these topics, but we can only continue our discussion Compos Mentis et Concordia cum veritate. Cheers. (talk) 05:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

My "sources" are the real ones - you can see the facsimile cover of the printed Judita, as well as Stulli's dictionary on the Web to confirm the aforementioned quotes. The paper by Knežević is abundantly referenced, as well as the works of academics in the second PDF. These are not "point of views", but facts; the other "side of the story" that you and your friend were deprived of in your "education" (i.e. propaganda) of Croatian language not "existing" prior to the 90s, and the appellative Illyrian denoting all south Slavdom prior to the Illyrian movement according the legend of Slavs being descendants of ancient Illyrians; it is just another miserable reflex of misconceptions imprinted into people's minds in the SFRJ period, where any kind of linguist "separatism" and the call to linguistic self-determination would be labeled as "nationalism" (as if there is something "wrong" with that) against the tenets of our "brotherhood and unity" society.
It's sad to see you confess that you "don't do research"; without properly sourced verifiable information your opinion isn't worth much around here. I eagerly await your sources that will "surely disprove mine". You can start with finding common isoglosses representing shared innovation for all dialects spoken by Croats, Bosniaks, Serbs and Montenegrins, minus the Slovenians. That would be necessary to establish criteria for genetic relationship and the existence of this alleged "Central South Slavic language" :-)
I don't "hate" everything connected to Serbs and Serbia; this is your POV in which you perceive anything "attacking" Yugoslav idyll as a manifestation of anti-Serb pro-Croat "nationalism". From a certain perspective, it probably is, as SFRJ was Serb-dominated state, Serbs much benefited from SC experiment (many Croatian borrowings), and they cherished the SC name the longest (up until 1997 in the Yugoslavia#5 constitution it was "Serbo-Croatian", IIRC). Even today, overwhelming amount of those who claim to speaking "SC" are in fact Serbs, or pro-Serbs. Naturally that they perceive wrong-minded ones as "anti-Serbs".
The only "hate" I have with Serbs and Serbia is the virulent nationalism, the one that has been digging mass graves in the Balkans for the last 2 centuries, the one of "heavenly people", SANU's Memorandum, Ćosić's "Nož", the one that makes Vojislav Šešelj write books titled Rimokatolički zločinački projekat veštačke hrvatske nacije while being detained in The Hague court on the charges of the crimes against humanity. For you see, the Croatian "extreme nationalism" is very pathetic in essence and is but a mere reflection of Serb nationalism (or historically, of any other anti-Croat hegemony). Compare the influence today of extreme-right parties such as HSP in the Croatian Parliament, and the radicals in Serbian parliament - the former has completely faded away once the myths it was attached to ceased to be operable in the minds of the people. For the extreme Serbs OTOH, the "Serbdom" is an essence of the strange mix of religion (Orthodoxy), "hate" towards usurpers of historical "Serbian lands", myths of "Kingdom of heaven" and some bizarre "conspiracies" by the Croats, Brittish or Vatican to "Catholicize" them. That cocktail has caused most of the massacres in the last 2 centuries in the Balkans (ever since anti-Ottoman uprisings, the culture of death starts to be immortalized in Serb folk epics and works such as the The Mountain Wreath). So yes, I am in a way a bit biased against Serbs, as IMHO the radical pan-Serbdom is the ultimate personification of everything decadent and backwards in the Balkans.
What was "achieved" in Yugoslav era was devastating for Croatia's culture, economy and demographics. For either of these topics billions of words could be written, corroborated by numerous sources. For you, it was the period of "prosperity" and commonness. We know the Yugoslav monster ended up, and how the experiments such as the "Serbo-Croatian wikipedia" fail miserably.
Standard Croatian and Serbian are based on the same dialect (different subdialects), but that does not necessarly mean that they are the "same language". Other important ingredients of the "language" mixture are the cultural and national tradition and millieu, dialects, and of course standardology. To defy the existence of 3-dialectal Croatian literary history continuously for the 9 centuries would be depriving a large part of Croatian national consciousness and identity. That was exactly what Serbocommunists were doing in the Yugoslavia. This is the reason why your friend thought that Marulić or Kašić "never called their language Croatian". You cannot write Serbian historical grammar, as there are essentially no Serbian vernacular books before the 19th century (I know of only 1 writer). Neither can you for these newly-invented Bosniak and Montenegrins, and that is what separates Croatian from the rest of the group.
There "huge" differences between Kajkavian and Čakavian are in fact usually much less then between e.g. two selected Slovenian dialects. For your information, Čakavian, Kajkavian and Štokavian ~ 500 years ago formed a dialect continuum, which was subsequently broken in lots of locations by massive relocations of populations, but is still present on hundreds of km. I've already explained you on one talk page (but you unsurprisingly ignore everything I say..) that even within Štokavian dialects there are differences that amount to mutual non-intelligibility. Try reading some Molise Croatian documents on website - it's Ikavian Štokavian with some primitive Neoštokavian traits. I'm sure that they're as unintelligible to you as is the Marulić's Judita - probably even more so. And do you remember what I said about Torlakian? :) It's genetically Štokavian with centuries of Balkan Sprachbund Bulgaro-Macedonian elements (see the cites from P. Ivić's book by your comrade Đorđe). So it's more related to Serbian than e.g. Čakavian or Kajkavian, but is less intelligible. This is how languages works. You might "laugh" at it, but these are facts my friend, facts that are stated in linguistic handbooks :)
What people speak in Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia&Hercegovina and Montenegro are a bunch of dialects, local idioms which are mutually genetically-dialectologically related as they are all to Slovenian dialects. They do not speak "SC". "SC" was politically-enforced cover term to denote 2 "variants" of stylised Ekavian and Ijekavian Neoštokavian, both of which were heavily based on Croatian-only literary heritage. Serbs (&Bosniaks, Montengrins..) can codify their standard language on whatever dialectal basis they want, Croats don't care..We have our own language, tradition and provenience, historically much more longer and stronger than others. Vatican Croatian Prayer Book, 14th century:
Gospod brani mene i ništa meni ne udi. U mjesto paše ondi me shrani. Svrhu vode oslađene izvede mene i dušu moju obrati. Izvede mene svrhu slijeda pravde zaradi imena svoga. Jere ako hodu posrjed sjeni smrtne, no boju se zla jere si ti sa mnom, prut tvoj i štap tvoj kojizi me utješa. Pripravio si prid očima mojima trpezu prima onima koji usiluju mene. Opritilio si uljem glavu moju i pitje tvoje opojilo me je koliko prosvijetljeno jest. I milosrdje tvoje slijedi mene sve dni života moga, da pribivam u domu Gospodinovu u duge dni.
Good for you that you've "learned" Serbian from old Yugoslav comics. When I see Serbs writing Croatian they usually make a lot of mistakes involving ije/je alternations and some basic lexical differences. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 06:55, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey, hey, calm down dude! You're repeating your 'ideas' over and over again, like a broken record:)). Sorry, but most of what you said above are just a new round of your marinated lies and attacks, that are coming from one more than obviously frustrated nationalist. Not all of your sources are valid ( your croatian Indo-europeanist can be anyone who can write a 'linguistic' book with some directed by HDZ new 'discoveries'), most of what you've said above is your personal POVs full of hatred ('Serbians made the graves on Balkans',yeah right, and who made the massive graves in NDH???), and much of that doesn't make any sense ( stories like 'Croatia was 'devastated' in former Yugoslavia' etc.). Majority of Croatians liked Yugoslavia, and they still like it silently, because of the HDZ regime. There are thousands of videos on you tube, books, songs, and other valid documents that confirm that MAJORITY of CROATIANS like(d) Yugoslavia, NOB, Partizans and felt totaly happy and proud being part of all that. Only the minority of isolated nationalists were against it, and they're slowely but surely losing their war, because the reality shows that connections between South Slavs are getting stronger and stronger every next day. Capische? And as I told you many times before, people and scientists recognize the actual and factual state of the matters, including those in the area of the language. Who cares about your 'isoglosses' and 'Juditas' and all other unimportant factors from the ancient times. They are PAST and it's THE END OF THE STORY. Many changes happened on the Balkans in the history, migrations, mixing of people etc. so that mentioning some 'ancient isoglosses' doesn't make any sense to today's state of the things. You need to see and recognize the actual language situation in the Central South Slavic language speaking area, dude. And that situation is: THE PEOPLE IN CROATIA, BOSNIA, SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO ARE SPEAKING ONE LANGUAGE, WITH A FEW VARIANTS OF IT! Their 'standard languages' or dialects are totally mutually intelligible and they can communicate without any problem, as it's confirmed with many mutual live TV shows, concerts, political programs and documentaries viewed in the same time in all 4 countries etc. There was NEVER used any interpreting between the speakers and TV watchers from Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia and Montenegro, and there will never be used any, because as the reality is, - they all speak SAME LANGUAGE. UNLIKE THIS, (Except for a small number of Central South Slavic language speakers, living north of Zagreb), A PERSON SPEAKING ONE OF THE VARIANTS OF THE CENTRAL SOUTH SLAVIC SYSTEM OR LANGUAGE (- SERBIAN, CROATIAN OR BOSNIAN) CANNOT COMMUNICATE WITH A SLOVENIAN SPEAKING PERSON WITHOUT AN INTERPRETOR. THE FACT IS THAT SLOVENIAN IS VERY DIFFERENT LANGUAGE FROM CROATIAN/SERBIAN/BOSNIAN AND IT'S NOT MUTUALLY INTELLIGIBLE WITH CROATIAN/SERBIAN/BOSNIAN! THAT'S WHY ALL THE SLOVENIAN SHOWS AND PROGRAMS SHOWN IN CROATIA, SERBIA OR BOSNIA ARE TRANSLATED AND TITLED, AND THAT'S WHY YOU SHOULD PUT THE GROUP OF CENTRAL SOUTH SLAVIC LANGUAGES AND DIALECTS (SERBIAN, CROATIAN, BOSNIAN) SEPARATE FROM SLOVENIAN. THOSE ARE THE FACTS, NO MATTER THAT YOU TRY TO HIDE THEM, THEIR HIDING IS POWERLESS. You can accept these facts or you can live on with your DELUSIONS, which won't take you anywhere. I don't want to discuss with you this 'issue' anymore, you can believe in whatever you want, but the time will show who was right, and it certainly won't be you and your ideas. So, please save yourself from sending me offences and bad comments, because they were, are and will stay worthless, and everything bad you say on this page will only reflect YOU and your level of culture. Bye and Cheers. (talk) 02:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

If I am "repeating" anything that's because you reiterate your misconceptions over and over again, and need to be re-edacuted over and over again on the same points. Maybe, if repeat enough times, you'll finally come to grasp it some day, or probably not as it'll collapse your romantic pan-Yugoslav worldview ;)
What exactly are my "marinated lies"? What I said was facts, that can be verified in scientific papers and university-level handbooks. That you perceive them as "lies" is likely a result of your inability to accept as truthful and veracious anything that is ultimately destructive to your Yugoslav fantasy, and amateurish conceptions of languages, dialects and idioms.
Ranko Matasović is far from being some "HDZ-sponsored nationalists". His Historical grammar of Croatian is one of the 3 Slavic historical grammars that not almost completely obsolete (there is also one for Bulgarian and OCS), having been based on discoveries made in the last 3-4 decades, and not on obsolete reconstructions of Proto-Slavic and Proto-Indo-European. Had you spent time reading parts of it, you would've realized it sooner or later, but since the book is probably too advance for non-specialists like yourself, it would likely be a waste of time for you. Hopefully, others more knowledgeable on the topic would care what it says, and what do others say. Unfortunately there are no sane Serb linguistis here on WP that could "confirm" their veracity and first-class scientific value to you, so I'm left alone as some Don Quijote ^_^ Again, find me a book (or a paper, whatever) that lists common isoglosses for this "Central South Slavic language" of yours and we'll talk. You might wanna skip all standard English-language handbooks, cause you ain't gonna find there anything supportive, trust me.
Serbs were the iniciators and "maintainers" of the Serb-Bosniak-Croat circle of revenge. It is no coincidence that Serbian amateur wannabe-linguist and "reformer" V.S.Karadžić [also the progenitor of pan-Serb nationalism, cf. Srbi svi i svuda and later works] was the first to coin the usage of "cleanse" in phrase "ethnic cleansing", describing the butchering of Turks [and the word Turk back then designated not just Ottomans, but also Muslim Slavs that nowadays identify themselves as Bosniaks] during the Serbian uprising against the Ottomans. Maybe you should read parts of Mountain Wreath and recorded reports and folk songs, esp. of the "great Serbian epic", which celebrates the cutting of "Turkish" throats and skull-cleaving as an ideal one should attain to. This was century and a half before NDH.
The majority of Croats did not "like Yugoslavia". Had they liked it, they wouldn't have voted for HDZ in the 1990s elections for 10 years in continuo, voting for the secession from the holy "Yugoslav matrix". You are seriously delusioned if you imagine that majority of Croats today holds fantasies of some Yugoslavia-like state. With all those Serb butchers walking freely in the streets greeting themselves with Četnik iconography, others like Kadijević having escaped to their genocidal brethren Russians [I pray to Justice that one day Putin and Medvedev will be charged for ethnic cleansing of Georgia they committed and blessed], there is little space for pan-Yugoslav commonness. Just look at how the "Serbo-Croatian wikipedia" failed. Serbs would never accept federation with states who support proud and independent Republic of Kosovo [with 2M Albanians lucky enought not to share the destiny of Croats and Bosniaks below Milošević's tanks], where Vukovar and Srebrenica would be deservingly commemorated and Četniks denounced in school handbooks as genocidal fascist-collaborators.
You again mention lots of silly things that somehow "support" your conclusion. No, scientists don "recognize" what you imagine they do - South Slavic languages are divided into West and East branch in every Slavic comparative handbook out there AFAIK. You should care about Marulić's Judita as three paragraphs above you demonstrated your immense ignorance by claiming that Croatian language "didn't exist" before the 1990s. Isoglosses are to languages what DNA is to biology: that's how dialects are formed (from "bundles" of isoglosses), and dialects grouped into languages. Modern standard languages are just a codified norm of some particular dialect, not necessarily even organic one.
Once again, people in Croatia, B&H, Montenegro and Serbia speak their local idioms ("dialects", retarded English does not distinguish between narječje, dijalekt and govor). The last common ancestor that is reconstructible for all the macro-dialects (Čakavian, Kajkavian, Štokavian, Torlakian) spoken by Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks and Montenegrins is Proto-West-South Slavic. Find me a source that claims otherwise and we can talk. If you can't, you must accept my sources as legitimate.
There is no "interpreting" between Danish, Swedish and 2 "Norwegian" languages, or subtitling of films, and that also makes them "one language"? Please, mutual intelligibility is just one criterion, of minor importance, and completely irrelevant in sociolinguistics. Croats called their language Croatian for 9 centuries, have a historical continuity of using all their 3 dialects, and don't really care what Bosniaks, Serbs and Montenegrins refer to or choose a dialectal basis for their own standard languages.
Tell me, can you understand stories in this document? It's Molise Croatian - Ikavian Štokavian with some retarded Neoštokavian features. However, the speech is more mutually intelligible to Southern Čakavian speaker than to you. Does this mean that Molise Crotian is a "separate language"? Of course it does not. You need some serious touch with reality to understand that the level of intelligibility is far from being a relevant criterion in linguistics. Learning 20-30 not so complicated "rules", and lexical differences aside, Molise Croatian could be easily turned to modern Croatian. Subconsciously, these rules are much more intuitive for archaic Čakavian speeches than for modern Neoštokavian used for standard Croatian. The Slovenian dialect used for standard Slovenian itself is not so mutually intelligible with some other Slovenian dialects, and is very much mutually intelligible with some Kajkavian dialects, which sinks the other of your "arguments". The interesting thing is that Kajkavian itself generally shares more isoglosses with Štokavian than with "Pannonian" dialects to which Slovenian belongs. It's pointless to speak of intelligibility in the presence of dialect continuum. I'm not trying to "hide" anything, but just add a layer of reality to the statements you proudly mention. Someone might take you seriously ;) --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 04:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

And what if I send you a link that talks about a serbian origin of Molise Slavs? It'd of course be a 'greater serbian propaganda' for you and your brainwashed head. And how about your links of anything you're talking about, are they not a cro-nationalistic propaganda? Fuj. By the way, Serbocroatian wikipedia is doing well and they will soon have their 20 000 article. It's a question what will happen with your isolated 'croatian wikipedia', who nobody takes as a serious. Croatian youth go and read English WP, knowing all the lies that are presented in your lost in the time piece of stubborness. Your new 'arguments' are still non-convincing and hopefully nobody will take them seriously. As I told you, you can stick to them as much as you want, but only the time will prove that you and your ideas were wrong. Nothing more to say, and I won't be reading your replies anymore, so all bad things that you will say to me will only refer to you, and nobody else. It was nice talking to you, now go to bed and get some sleep and never come back. BYE! (talk) 06:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it would be Greater Serbian propaganda, as it was laid out by the father of pan-Serbianism Vuk Stefanović Karadžić and his blind followers, according to whom all Štokavians are "Serbs" (in Srbi svi i svuda and other "papers" written by this ignorant amateur). Read some real studies, like the one here, on site, where these pan-Serbian misappropriations of Molise Slavs are demistified and ridiculed. When Serbs were dropping bombs on Dubrovnik and devastating its outskirts, they published pathetic propaganda books like Srpstvo Dubrovnika in which Greater Serbianism would be camouflaged as a legitimization for a genocide, as if they've been just "reclaiming what is already theirs" [the only problem being that Old Dubrovnikans never self-referred to themselves as "Serbs", LOL] Seriusly, read the above links, from "prva srpska bugarštica" to linguistic analysis, esp. the parts:

  Kad bi doseljenici u Gioia del Colle g. 1497. bili Srbi, valjalo bi ne samo pronaći povijesne dokaze nego odgovoriti i na ova pitanja, ako je to uopće moguće:

a) Otkud onda tim doseljenicima u Gioia del Colle, i uopće svima u južnoj Italiji, zapadnoštokavski ikavski govor, ponešto retardiran novoštokavski naglasak itd..? [Note that Ikavian Štokavian prevalently Croatian, and is spoken by something like 0.01% Serbs today]

b) Otkud onda u njihovu govoru toliko čakavizama na svim jezičnim razinama, ako su, kako kaže prof. M. Pantić, samo vrlo kratko, tek usputno boravili na primorju?

c) Kako to onda da nakon toliko desetljeća provedenih pod turskim zulumom ti navodni doseljenici iz duboke unutrašnjosti nisu ponijeli sa sobom u svojem jeziku bilo kamo u južnu Italiju makar koji turcizam te materijalne i duhovne kulture u ozračju koje su priIično dugo živjeIi? Ništa od toga!

The winner in all this won't be the croatian side, but the side of the truth. Central South Slavic languages are a reality and it will stay so. Your efforts to separate the same language of Serbs and Croats will fail, because you don't have any arguments that are world-wide accepted, your 'arguments' are a product of a dirty nationalistic, empty and miserable propaganda, which on moments looks like a pure racism, and as such it's not acceptable in today's civilized world. Serbocroatian wikipedia is doing well, they just had their 20.0000 article, and the number is growing every next day. Your separatistic cro-propaganda is hopeless and Yugoslavian unity will be reborn again, it's an unstoppable process, which is growing stronger every next year. You can just watch the best ever show in Croatia and Serbia -'Operacija trijumf' and cry in your agony. No more any cro-nationalism can brainwash the new croatian generations, 90% of whom listen to serbian folk music, sing its songs and are proud of it. It's time for the truth to come out, and the truth is not on your side. On sight is the end of your nationalistic propaganda, forever. And one more thing, maybe you can sell some of your lies to some Americans, who don't know much about South Slavic languages, but your propaganda will never enter the European Union, because Europeans know well everything about the same language of the Serbs, Croats and Bosnians. Now go to sleep, you're not welcome to my talk page anymore, shoo, shoo:)). (talk) 07:18, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Right, as if I care what you think, being so hopelessly indoctrinated ;) The real reason why I'm responding to your talk page is 1) someone casually seeing this realizes that your "objections" have been professionally refuted, with no real counter-evidence from your side other than attempts to "ridicule" my claims or sources as some "nationalist propaganda" 2) other see that you've been engaged with dealing with some real subjects, so if and when you again continue troll talkpages of articles and call people "chauvinistic fascists", "retards" etc. I can ask for your much longer blockage. Bye! ;) --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 07:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I said: BYEEE! (talk) 23:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Your edits (3)[edit]


I remain unconvinced about your good will in editing Wikipedia. This is not the place to discuss some point you feel strongly about. Your mission here is not to sanitize Wikipedia but to write content basing on reliable, verifiable, and mainstream sources as well as discuss in a civil way with other editors assuming their good faith.

If you feel that you are mistreated in any way you can report it on Administrator's noticeboard. There's also Wikipedia:Ethnic and cultural conflicts noticeboard for this kind of problematic disputes.

Please behave in a constructive and good-mannered way to stay here as a user.

Kpjas (talk) 23:33, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey Kpjas I really don't have time to go further and report these attacks, but I would just point out to you that: - these guys who I was dealing with these days -they are all most likely supporters of one destructive and defeated force from the past, they're supporting the ones who glorify their fascisoid NDH and fascism and who salute 'heil Hitler' at the soccer stadiums. They, the cro-nationalists, are of the same kind like those who ruined one respected and progressive country like Yugoslavia and never regreted it. Even today they openly attack everything connected with Yugoslavia, including the ever growing collaboration and new started unification process of the former yugoslav peoples. They are supporters of those, who sent their terrorists to crash yugoslavian planes in 1970's and spread hatred and separatism between ex-Yugoslavians. And now, since all the world stood against them and their balkano-self-collapsing propaganda, they're playing their dirty game with the Serbocroatian language, finding some non-existing matters, with only to them known quazi-"sources". People originating from South East Europe can easily recognize and stop these intrudors, which is something that wikipedia should probably do too. I am actually surprised how I didn't get any support from the administrators from Srbocroatian wikipedia, because whenever something like this happened before they would have cut the cro-nationalist's edits off in the next minute:)). I hope they will do it again, whenever they are aware of what's going on. Anyhow, dear Krzsysztof, I wish you the best in your editing on wikipedia, if I have time in the future - I'll join it as an editor too; And at the end I want to repeat again:- please be aware and if you can-control the cro-nationalists infiltrated on wikipedia as much as you can because they are nothing but supporters of some destructive elements of a defeated nationalistic propaganda, and who behind the mask of 'good people' have always some 'hidden agenda' that they're working on, luckilly with no effect. Best Regards to you Krzsysztof and to Hexagon1; Cheers.

And one more thing, it's enough to see their talk pages (Ivan's or Ante Perkovic's) and to see their real dirty nationalistic face. To see how many times they are in conflict with the other administrators and how many times they have been banned from editing wikipedia. Even they're blocking themselves from wikipedia, ha, ha ( ) Also their talk pages show how many normal people disagree and argue with them on a constant basis, what offensive words and manners they use to offend people and how helpless in all this these poor cro-nationalists are. Seems like these few nationalists are fighting against the whole world. That's sad and pathetic. Regards; (talk) 07:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

November 2008[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg Please stop. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, you will be blocked for vandalism. - Unpopular Opinion (talk) 07:03, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.


[4], [5] - Perhaps you need to familiarize yourself with the concept of wiki, where everything written is preserved in edit history. It's pointless to cut and rearrange the "unwanted" material. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 13:50, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I am aware of that and also of the fact that many other users cut and rearrange the 'unwanted' material. So I am not the first, nor I am the last user to do that. Bye. (talk) 05:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Calm down![edit]

When you're an IP on Wikipedia and not an established user, it is very easy to be marginalized, ignored, provoked, and finally banned. If you want to be taken more seriously please heed this advice:

  • Create yourself a userpage with some info, it's an easy way to improve your standing :) (its certainly better than an IP)
  • DO NOT under any circumstances insult an editor in any way. Anyone who doesn't agree with you will actually be very happy if you do: then they can get you blocked. You don't have to be extremely polite, but you must remain neutral in wording.
  • If blocked for a period, DO NOT avoid the block (wait until its over). You WILL get indefinitely banned.
  • REMAIN CALM, a temper can only work against you on Wikipedia. (This basically means NEVER breach the Three Revert Rule)
  • Use SOURCES(!)
  • Discuss only presented sources or actual changes in the article. Getting involved in ideological debates gets you nowhere. (An advice I should take as well :)
  • Try to compromise.
  • In my experience, people will very rarely admit they are wrong on Wikipedia. This is why you need sources and compromise.

More specifically, your behavior on Talk:Serbo-Croatian language does not work in your favor. Propose a specific change in the article, then support it with a source (but make sure the edit only contains information supported by the source). Do not get involved in fruitless debate. Hope I've helped. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 15:42, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the advices, I will register soon, just need plenty of time to be an active member. I am happy that there are more and more reasonable and progressive people from Dalmatia like yourself, who see the things like they are, and who cannot be brainwashed by the idiotic cro-nationalistic racistic propaganda. Also I am vary happy that the editors on wikipedia really don't give a shit :)) for what those nationalistic imbeciles are presenting here or losing their nerves for. They will get what they deserve, because who sends evil-he gets twice more evil back. Thanks Direktor, i ostanimo doslijedni u obrani istine o nasem jeziku. Neka crknu sva nacionalisticka djubrad zajedno sa svojim lazima, pobjedimo ih zauvijek u Novoj Godini. Sve najbolje tebi u Novoj Godini i nemoj se bojati da povratis svoj 'babel language' templet u svoj profil, u inat svim bolesnim nacionalistickim mozgovima koji na ovakav ili onakav nacin uticu na tebe. Sritno i Pozdrav:)). (talk) 06:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

See, that's what I mean. Don't think I do not understand what you're talking about, but this sort of language only turns people against you. Zenanarh and Ivan Štambuk are ok guys, they may not share your view on some particular issue, but that's what Wikipedia is about: sharing differing views, it certainly does not mean they're fanatics (especially since most people would probably agree with them). (Now, I'm not saying there are no REAL fanatics, check out this guy, for example: User:AP1929.) I hope I did not turn out "patronizing", that was certainly not my intent :) A Happy New Year to you as well. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 08:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Although I don't see any reason why Ivan and Ceha can be 'ok guys' as long as they turn the truth into (white) lies on wikipedia, I am glad that they're not that extreme cases like the one you mentioned above. With that one I would not even talk, and probably erase all his comments on my personal page. Probat cu da pisem manje uvredljive rijeci, koje se nekada ne mogu izbjeci kada je tako ocito da druga strana nije u pravu, te kada ih i druga strana upotrebljava. Jos samo da te potsjetim sta se tebi desavalo u pocetku kada si otvorio profil, kada su ti ovakvi ili slicni 'ok-tipovi' stavljali templete sa porukama da si 'homosexual', i izrugavali se tvom profilu dok ih nisi sredio. To me puno odvraca od otvaranja vlastitog profila, jer znam da bi se takve stvari mogli desiti i mome profilu, a nemam puno vremena da se bavim 'sredjuvanjem' takvih gadova, itd. - Sretna Nova tebi ponovo i nadam se da cu se uskoro registrirati preko novog kompjutera, sa posve novom IP i sa malo boljim rijecnikom, primjerenim editora wikipedije. Cheers. (talk) 03:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah, yes. The legendary and elusive The TruthTM. I'm afraid such a thing does not exist on Wikipedia :). The only thing Wikipedia is concerned with are sources and WP:verifiability. The use of the term "The Truth" is frowned upon, for more information why, read WP:TRUTH. Regardless of whether or not the other user(s) are "ok guys" or not, you must remain civil. Furthermore, EVEN if the other side uses bad language and is incorrect in a particular dispute, you must not use improper expressions or language. Be extremely pleasant and to the point. I cannot emphasize this enough: your goal is to be so unbelievably even-tempered and polite the other side looks extremist and radical, instead of you (I'm speaking in general terms, not that Zen and/or Ivan Štambuk are in any way "radicals"). Also, discuss only sources and actual changes in the article. Do not engage in general ideological debate, and do not comment on users -> comment on content instead. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 08:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you please prevent the discussion page on Serbo-Croatian language from being reverted, as I removed the 2 'parts' by myself and Ivan, which were with not very appropriate language to be there? Now the thread seems to be ok, with not too many offensive words, or if there are some, they are 'even' from both sides:)). Can you do that DIREKTOR? Thanks, and I am glad that my new section about 'Serbo-Croatian being recognized as a ISO-693-3 standard' will have some positive effests on the article. Cheers. (talk) 19:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

And one more thing, not wanting to go into further 'fight' with Ivan, Ceha or anyone of their spoiled kind, I would stay away for a while from the hot discussions, unless I need to answer to some insult. All the insults they've sent to me or they will send me are totally worthless, reflecting only their broken, frustrated and fragile state of mind. Anyway, I am happy to have succeeded (again) to stop the nationalists to spread further their pathetic propaganda on wikipedia. I have more arguments about how different are today's Cakavian and Stokavian, and how they are MUCH more different than any MINOR differences between Serbian/Croatian/Bosnian, a fact that is so obvious that only degenerics can ignore it, also how these differences between Cakavian and Stokavian are equal to the ones between 2 separate languages, but...maybe some other time. Surprisingly, their last comments (on 'Montenegrin') seems to be not that irrational:)), and I hope that they're realizing that they need to look at the things much differently. At the end, I consider this as another my small victory for the truth and justice on wikipedia and I hope I'll have more time in the future to do also some editing. ( What's left on wikipedia for editing, seems like everything is already there:))? ) Cheers and Regards. (talk) 07:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)