Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Serbia

Main page

Assessment

Templates

Navigation

Popular pages

Resources

Members

Showcase

Welcome to WikiProject Serbia talk page! Feel free to leave messages in English as well as Serbian. The Serbian messages will have an English translation below, so that English-speaking members can understand everything. Слободно остављајте поруке на енглеском као и на српском. Поруке на српском ће имати енглески превод испод текста, како би људи, који говоре само енглески, разумели све. Create New Topic Women in Red November contest open to all Announcing Women in Red's November 2017 prize-winning world contest Contest details: create biographical articles for women of any country or occupation in the world: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest|November 2017 WiR Contest]] Read more about how Women in Red is overcoming the gender gap: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red|WikiProject Women in Red]] (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 08:01, 23 October 2017 (UTC) Move request Talk:Ana Ivanovic. It's Christmas soon. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:18, 28 November 2017 (UTC) Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise. A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at https://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Serbia Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 18:36, 3 December 2017 (UTC) Movement of Socialists Hello, I've reverted a few recent changes to the article Movement of Socialists. The changes had been made by an anonymous user who changed the listed ideologies in the infobox several times, and also removed a maintenance tag and broke formatting. This seemed like vandalism or at least nonconstructive editing, so I removed it. However, I have no idea whether the current stated ideologies are correct. Would someone familiar with the subject please check this? Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 05:11, 8 December 2017 (UTC) WP:SRBPLACE We need to reach concensus regarding placenames at WP:SRBPLACE. Prnjavor (Gornji Milanovac) or Prnjavor, Gornji Milanovac? Past discussion here. Is there any good reason why we do not follow normal guidelines as per WP:PLACEDAB? I am asking No such user, Vanjagenije, 23 editor, FkpCascais, Antidiskriminator, MirkoS18, BokicaK, Aca Srbin, NeroN BG on input.--Zoupan 03:29, 29 December 2017 (UTC) Not that I'm pinged, but IMHO a better example would be Palilula (dab page). If it's a municipality within a city, use a comma. If it's a village/town within a municipality, use parenthesis. BytEfLUSh Talk 03:40, 29 December 2017 (UTC) I agree with BytEfLUSh's statement, considering the section has reflected "If it's a municipality within a city, use a comma. If it's a village/town within a municipality, use parenthesis." for over 4 years, including BytEfLUSh's recommendation to use parenthetical disambiguation for towns to be added to the guideline. (The section has been in it's current state for longer than that, but I eventually gave up on locating its origin.) Either way, thank you Zoupan for informing me of this discussion via my talk page. Steel1943 (talk) 12:27, 29 December 2017 (UTC) I think generally, the comma is used as in Prnjavor, Gornji Milanovac, but I am not sure if that is the consensus, we should try and see globally what the consensus is. FkpCascais (talk) 03:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC) BytEfLUSh, Steel1943, disregard that section. Why does this rule apply to Serbia only? We all know that "it's been like that for 4 years" is a weak argument.--Zoupan 13:16, 1 January 2018 (UTC) @Zoupan: I cannot as it is part of a guideline and it's been there for so long; as far as I know, going against that could be breaking some sort of long-standing and strong consensus. If you want to present a better argument for your stance, I would recommend finding when and how (was it added per a consensus in a discussion, etc.) the Serbia-specific parenthetical wording was added to the guideline, as well as possibly who added it. Steel1943 (talk) 17:42, 1 January 2018 (UTC) Since it's been over two weeks with no discussion, at this time, I'm going to proceed with moving pages per the way which the guideline is currently written. Steel1943 (talk) 12:57, 18 January 2018 (UTC) There is no sort of strong consensus. It was added by No such user in September 2011. I call on the predominant and long-standing usage on WP:NCGN. Simple as that. Why have you, Steel1943, not given your stance on the matter? It would be a tie-breaker as no one seems to care.--Zoupan 01:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC) But I did give my stance. My stance is to follow the guideline ... whatever it is. (So yes, I really don't have an opinion either way about how this guideline is written.) But, now that the origin of the guideline has been found, I shall await further discussion. Anyways, thanks for locating how/when this guideline was added. Steel1943 (talk) 02:08, 19 January 2018 (UTC) I explained why I added it in the previous discussion (/Archive_8#Place_names) – it had been a long-standing de facto convention, possibly taken over from Serbian Wikipedia, or who knows how, as it predates my participation, and possibly even predates the "universal comma-convention for places". As I said, I do not insist on it, and would gladly switch to comma-convention, but I do insist on the following: If we change it, we have to rename all the affected articles, and that's a significant task; I estimate that some ~1000 articles would have to be moved, so we should establish a procedure how (a bot task?); For villages/populated places specifically, for WP:CONSISTENCY we should retain the municipality/city name as the sole disambiguator (i.e. Foo, Subotica as it is mostly now) and disallow ad-hoc disambiguators such as Foo, Serbia or Foo (village). No such user (talk) 09:44, 19 January 2018 (UTC) I'm ok with that. A bot task it is.--Zoupan 23:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Why the Lang-sr-cyr template was changed? Now we have the case where, for exemple, Gjakova, says in the first line: Gjakova (Albanian: Gjakovë) or Đakovica (Serbian: Ђаковица) is a... Now there is a wrong indication that Đakovica is some other language and that only the Cyrillic version is Serbian. Could people help in turning things as they were and making the template indicate "Serbian Cyrillic" as it did before and make an input at Template talk:Lang-sr-Cyrl? FkpCascais (talk) 15:48, 1 January 2018 (UTC) Disruptive editing Note for everyone interested in Serbian history: take a look at recent disruptive edits and reverts by some Croatian and Albanian editors on several pages: Zachlumia and also Persecution of Christians, and Anti-Orthodoxy. These things are obviously coordinated and highly problematic. Sorabino (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2018 (UTC) @Sorabino: You are actively edit-warring yourself. That is not the correct way to settle content disputes. See WP:Dispute resolution. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:33, 30 January 2018 (UTC) @Vanjagenije: Did you take a look at those edits and reverts? I see that you locked the page Zachlumia on version produced by Croatian and Albanian editors, and that does not surprises me, since that is your way of promoting yourself as an "objective" administrator. You did something similar when another Croatian user made a series of disruptive edits in articles on Serbian Patriarchs. But lets go back to the page Zachlumia - take a look again, you actually locked the page on version that has only Croatian designations! Speaking about the language, I noticed that you are removing codes for Serbian language (lang-sr) from articles, and replacing them with codes for "Serbo-Croatian" language (lang-sh). Why are you doing that? I saw that you are designating "Serbo-Croatian" as your mother language on your user page. That is OK, but in articles on Serbian history and culture, designation for terms on native language should be Serbian. That is simply the matter of pure facts. Today, according to official census data, "Serbo-Croatian" language is spoken by far less than 1 % of Serbs and Croats, and therefore information about that language is irrelevant. And for your "contribution" to the question of the proper name of article for Bogorodica Ljeviška, let me inform you that entry on that Serbian Church was recently removed from the list in Cathedral of the Dormition (disambiguation) because of the current pure state of that important article, and reasons for such state can be seen in the talk page of that article. But that is just the tip of the iceberg. Sorabino (talk) 16:32, 30 January 2018 (UTC) @Sorabino: You're kind of going off topic there. Articles have talk pages, there is also WP:Dispute resolution, no need for edit warring. BytEfLUSh Talk 22:13, 30 January 2018 (UTC) @BytEfLUSh: What do you mean by "of the topic"? This is the common talk page of the Wiki Project Serbia, here we can discuss issues regarding all articles that are in the scope of this project. Above questions are also discussed on the talk pages of particular articles. Besides that, the question of language and terminology are of common interest. By ISO resolutions, code "sh" is officially deprecated and therefore the use of that code should come to end. Sorabino (talk) 22:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC) This probably is a good place to discuss a topic relevant to several related articles. Not having a source to look at, if ISO has deprecated usage of a certain abbreviation, depending on their stated reasoning for doing so and whether it is consistent with our own policies and guidelines, that could reasonably be discussed here. John Carter (talk) 22:58, 30 January 2018 (UTC)