User talk:Giovanni Giove
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Welcome
Hi there Giovanni, welcome to Wikipedia!
I'm happy that there are more people interested in Ivan Lupis. :) I would, however, advise that you put the general information about the noble family into a separate article (maybe Lupis family? link it from Lupis).
If you need anything, feel free to tell me. Good luck. --Joy [shallot] 22:51, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for answering. Let's move this discussion to Talk:Ivan Lupis. Can you copy your comments over there, or allow me to do it? --Joy [shallot] 10:50, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Lastovo
Hi there, i left a response on my talk page, but I have since re-read your contributions. Most should probably end up making it in there, but my central reason was to revert them because they did have a little bias, but mostly because it didnt read well (grammar and flow). Please do the following quickly...
a) fix the grammer and flow. It doesnt read well.
b) source all your claims
c) add information where it is relevent. Also the Italian minority on Lastovo was never significant except for the 20 year interwar period. It needs to be mentioned, but not overstated.
I'll check tomorrow and we can discuss. Cheers, Uvouvo 13:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Giovanni, i have rewritten the pieces you added into the article. I have left all of your additions, just rearranged their order and some wording as it didnt read well. There are two places where i have asked for citations (one showing the census from 1920, and the second showing the movement of Italian people from around dalmatia to Lastovo. If you could source the books they came from that would be great. Uvouvo 05:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WP:NPOV
You missunderstand the meaning of {{NPOV}}. It doesn't mean
I don't like what this article says, but I don't have time to change it. Let other people do that. Just want everybody to know that I don't agree with the entire article.
It means:
I tried to change, add or delete some parts of the article, I gave valid references, but some people keep reverting my edits.
There is a difference. That's why I'm removing the {{NPOV}} for now.
- Please, report me to an administrator.
- Or, you might first search my talk page where you will find that I did exactly what you are tring to do now, until told by administrator to stop.
- It's your choice. --Ante Perkovic
[edit] di Gozze deleted
Nicolò Vito di Gozze was a copyvio from [1]. It was deleted under WP:CSD A8. Feel free to repost in your own words, and don't forget a rock-solid assertion of notability, like a list of published works. Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/email 04:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
== Nationalism? ==
Giovanni, whome are you fooling? If you continue to deliberately spread your expansionistic ideas, I'll report you to admins! Think twice before you say something about nationalism.
What do you think, that over here live only unliterate shepherds? And that you can sell your ideas about Croatian regions as you wish? Forget it!
You've deliberately changed the native toponyms in Croatia (particularly in littoral areas) into Italian ones. Or, if you want it that way, you're insisting on Italian names of Croatian cities, and threat (with blocking)to anybody who wants to change that.
I've changed those toponyms into NATIVE names, Croat names. And you call that - vandalism? If you can't live with the fact that Croats live here, that Croats are majority, and that Mussolini got kick in the butt over here, that's your problem! But don't lie other users here.
If you want to impose "laws", like Mussolini's fascist laws in 1920's, which forbid giving "funny Slavic names" to children (these laws were especially brought for purpose of violent de-croatization and de-slovenization of majority population in Istria, Croats and Slovenians), than we're having a serious problem over here on Wikipedia.
Yes, we've reverted imposed Italian names in 1943 in Croatia and Slovenia, as soon as occupied cities were liberated.
It's no problem to do it again. Kubura 09:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] nazionalismo
ho letto il tuo messaggio nella mia discussione italiana ma su proposta dell'amministratore Gac, che ho criticato diverse volte, sono stato bloccato per un anno dopo aver minacciato di querela l'utente Fotogian: motivo decisamente opinabile e durata assurda di blocco! Nella sezione italiana posso collaborare ma non posso registrarmi quindi preferisco comunicare qui. Se leggi la mia discussione inglese puoi vedere che anche io son stato accusato di nazionalismo ma da utenti con i quali ho avuto contrasti notevoli: tra questi anche un veneziano ossia user:Ghepeu che sulla questione di foibe massacres e istrian exodus la pensa come un titoista slavo! Kubura è solo uno dei tanti e noi possiamo solo segnalare tali utenti agli amministratori che possono bloccarli. Penso che tu abbia la competenza per intervenire in talk:Josip Broz Tito: a questa discussione puoi dare un'occhiata dalla sezione intitolata Tag in poi? Se leggi alcune parti di questa pagina dall'inizio ti rendi conto che molti utenti contestano la faziosità di alcuni redattori iugoslavi che esaltano Tito come leader non dictator e gli attribuiscono solo meriti non ammettendo le sue responsabilità riguardo Bleiburg massacre, foibe massacres e Istrian exodus nonchè OZNA e UDBA: tali utenti sono, in particolare, l'amministratore croato Dijxtra con lo sloveno Zocky e i serbi Dcabrilo e Zivan56. Tali utenti, anche se non lo dichiarano, sembrano comunisti fanatici e Dijxtra mi ha bloccato per un giorno perchè ho definito Zivan56 un bugiardo. Dunque t'invito a lasciare un commento in tale pagina di discussione riguardo un articolo contestato che alcuni titoisti pretendono di trasformare in testo di esaltazione del dittatore come esige il culto della personalità e a intervenire nella redazione e discussione, se vuoi, di foibe massacres e Istrian exodus. Io detesto tutti i totalitarismi e tutti i dittatori! Ciao,--PIO 01:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I've left a message for Kubura. I don't know how much good it will do, though - he's a very tiresome ultranationalist, I'm afraid. -- ChrisO 12:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Citing sources
Look at WP:CITE, and WP:FOOT. You can also look at how I created the citation for the article by Knez you linked to. Reference numbering is automatic; there is no need to try to keep things numbered. Argyriou 22:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Serbian origin
Maybe you didn't noticed in all that fury that preoccupies you, but there are no links connecting Ruđer Bošković to Serbs. So, please, stop returning wriong categories. --Ante Perkovic 14:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well, you admited that you don't know if his father was Serbian or not. If there was no nationality at that time, then why not put him under Bosniaks also? Or even Bantu. Please, if you are unfamiliar with the sbject, just keep away of it. --Ante Perkovic 21:35, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- Also, You must know that all those Serbian categories are under category:Serbia, not Category:Serbs. Since he had nothing to do with Serbia (or Serbs, but leave it asside at the momment), I'm removing these categories for good. --Ante Perkovic 21:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Well, I hope you're not saying that there weren't any Serbs in Herzegovina in the history... :) There were, of course. And there was a Serb family of Boskovic, whose descendants exist today as well. --Djordje D. Bozovic 21:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Oh, you think that Serbs live in Serbia only? >:( Well, you are deeply, deeply wrong! I really can't believe that there are people who think that. Especially because you're from Italy, the neighbourhood. I don't want to talk about this any more! I can't! Please refer to some geography and history textbooks before you make such comments. :( --Djordje D. Bozovic 22:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- In deed? Sorry, I'm just pist off (is that the expression?) because of such an enormous Croatian, Bosniak and Albanian nationalistic propaganda. :( --Djordje D. Bozovic 22:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I am very sorry if I insulted you.
- The nationalities actually were quite clear back then: all the Orthodox speakers of Serbo-Croatian were the Serbs, the Muslims refered to themselves as the Turks, and the Catholics were either the Croats or they used some other name - regional (Bosniaks [yes, they were Catholics, not connected to present-day Bosniaks!], Ragusans, Slavs...) or another one (Sokci, Bunjevci, Krasovani, Iliri...). That's how it was, really. --Djordje D. Bozovic 22:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
[edit] Monte Cassino
Hi. I see in the Cassino article you have replaced the name of General Guillaume with that of Gen Juin. I didn't write this bit originally but as I understand it Juin was in command of the French Corps whilst Guillaume led the 4th Maroccan Mountain Division. Do you mind if I reflect this in the text, or do you believe otherwise?Stephen Kirrage 09:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Serbs and Serbia; nationalities in the past
Here's what Vuk Karadzic says about Serbs and Serbia:
The one who does not understand this job could say that the name 'Serb' is from the present-day Serbia, just like for example Slavonian from Slavonia, Herzegovinian from Herzegovina, Montenegrin from Montenegro, etc.; but the one who knows some of the Slavonic history must know that the Serbs brought this name with them when they came into these lands, and the country got its name after them. Where is the southern part of the present-day Serbia (Kosovo and Metohia), there was the middle of the former one, and it spead from Danube to the Greek isles and from Adriatic Sea to Macedonia. And I think that the name 'Serbia' was made in recent times, since the Serbian Empire broke apart, because I don't know if one could find somewhere that some of our kings and emperors were called kings or emperors 'of Serbia', but 'of the Serbs'. Dobrovsky and Shafarik have proved that all the Slavonic peoples were called the Serbs once, and that this name is older than the name Slavs.
He also wrote this (about the nationalities):
It is really known that Serbs now live in present-day Serbia (between Drina and Timok rivers, and between Danube and Stara planina), in Metohia (from Kosovo across Stara planina, where is Dusan's seat at Prizren, Serbian patriarchy of Pec, and the monastery of Decani), in Bosnia, in Herzegovina, in Zeta, in Montenegro, in Banat, in Backa, in Srijem, on the right banks of Danube from above Osijek to Saintadrew, in Slavonia, in Croatia (and Turkish and Austrian krajina), in Dalmatia, and in all Adriatic littorial almost from Trieste to Bojana river. That's why I said in the beginning 'it is really known', because it is still not known how many Serbs there are in Albania and Macedonia. I was talking in Cetinje (in Montenegro) with two men from Diber, who told me that there are many Serbian villages over there, where people speaks Serbian just like they spoke, between Serbian and Bulgarian, but yet closer to Serbian than to real Bulgarian.
In these mentioned places there appear to be about five million people who speak one single language, but are divided in three by the religion: one can say that there is about three million people of the Greek religion, and: one million in whole Serbia (with Metohia), one million in Austrian lands (in Banat, in Backa, in Srijem, on the right banks of Danube, in Slavonia, Croatia, Dalmatia and Boka), and one million in Bosnia, Herzegovina, Zeta and Montenegro; and of the remaining two million one can say that two thirds are of the Turkish religion (in Bosnia, Herzegovina, Zeta etc.), and one third of the Roman religion (in Austrian lands and in Bosnia, Herzegovina and Bar region). Only the first three million are called Serbs or Serbians, and the rest don't want to take this name, but those of the Turkish religion think that they are real Turks, and that's how they call themselves, although you can't find one of the hundred people to speak Turkish; and those of the Roman religion call themselves either by the places where they live, for example Slavonians, Bosnians (or Bosniaks), Dalmatians, Ragusans etc., or, as especially the writers do, by some old, who knows whose name: Illyrians; those first call them Bunjevci in Backa, Sokci in Srijem, in Slavonia and in Croatia, and Latins around Dubrovnik and in Boka.
I hope you enjoyed in reading as much as I did in translating. :) --Djordje D. Bozovic 02:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Juin
I have removed your section about his war crimes because you give no source for that serious allegtion and I have found no site on the internet who agree with you. If you give some crediable sources I would be happy to restore the section myself Carl Logan 06:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Marocchinate
We have some objections for this articles verifiability. Can you help as source which part of this article is from which source? Thank you. Wandalstouring 22:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
1. "For fifty hours you will be the absoulte masters of what you will find beyond the enemy. Nobody will punish you for what you will do, nobody will ask you about what you will get up". (in the article)
This is a direct quotation in the article. Who said it and where is it sourced? Please give it in the original language to verify the translation.
2. French authorities still don't recognize the crimes. (in the article)
http://www.sonic.net/~bstone/archives/990909.shtml
"Unfortunately for the Goumiers, their military success did not prevent their fearsome reputation from taking its toll as exceptional numbers of Moroccans were executed—many without trial—for allegedly murdering, raping, and pillaging their way across the Italian countryside." So there was immidiate punishment for the crimes. "The French authorities sought to defuse the problem by importing numbers of Berber women to serve as "camp followers" in rear areas set aside exclusively for the Goumiers." So the problem was clearly recognized by French military command and tried to solve.
3. http://italy.indymedia.org/news/2005/11/928175_comment.php
"I marocchini erano affetti da gravi malattie veneree che trasmisero alle donne e alle bambine violentate. Malattie che provocarono interruzioni e aborti spontanei nella maggioranza dei casi."
It talks about raping children (Happened either elsewhere during WWII), not grown up men. Where is your source on raping men?
4. biased source: http://www.dalvolturnoacassino.it/asp/doc.asp?id=001&p=4
"I gourmiers marocchini, 12.000 diavoli provenienti dalle montagne del Riff, fanno parte del Corpo di Spedizione Francese comandato dal generale Juin."
5. racial content: http://www.pacioli.net/ftp/maturita/iacomelli/marocchinate.htm
"Un'altra fondamentale novità che la denuncia e gli studi apportano alla vulgata su questi fatti è che non furono solo i marocchini a macchiarsi di tali nefandezze, ma anche algerini, tunisini e senegalesi. Nonché «bianchi» francesi: ufficiali, sottufficiali e di truppa. E qualche italiano aggregato ai «liberatori»."
6. contradicting sources (see the English source) http://www.storialibera.it/epoca_contemporanea/II_guerra_mondiale/monte_cassino_1944_scatenate_i_marocchini.html
"La sensazione di impotenza, la tolleranza mostrata dai comandi verso i marocchini, il riconoscimento ufficiale che pareva accompagnare la loro violenza selvaggia e indiscriminata, totalmente al di fuori di una possibile regolamentazione, sconcertò gli abitanti dei paesi liberati. L'impossibilità di una qualsiasi difesa dinnanzi al dispiegarsi di una ferocia animalesca (più volte richiamata dall'accostamento dei goumier alle bestie), così feroce da fuoriuscire dalla sfera umana (indemoniati e diavoli sono infatti definiti ripetutamente i marocchini), l'abbandono subito dalle autorità alleate in cui avevano riposto tanta fiducia, segnarono in maniera indelebile la memoria dei giorni di guerra. L'immagine restituitaci, e dalla documentazione archivistica e dalle testimonianze orali, è quella di un paesaggio infernale: «I soldati marocchini che avevano bussato alla porta e che non venne aperta, abbattuta la porta stessa colpivano la Rocca con il calcio del moschetto alla testa facendola cadere a terra priva di sensi, quindi veniva trasportata di peso a circa 30 metri dalla casa e violentata mentre il padre (...) da altri militari veniva trascinato, malmenato e legato a un albero. Gli astanti terrorizzati non potettero arrecare nessun aiuto alla ragazza e al genitore in quanto un soldato rimase di guardia con il moschetto puntato sugli stessi» (13)."
[edit] Koper, Isonzo
(N)POV has nothing to do with the name of these articles. I don't remember you announcing your move from Koper to Koper - Capodistria. The name of this town is not Koper - Capodistria, it's Koper or Capodistria! See this excerpt from WP:NC: "Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." Markussep 20:05, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- In that case I would live in Sittard-Zitterd. Don't you see that's unworkable? And why did you have to remove my 100% correct and useful addition that Koper is the Slovenian name and Capodistria the Italian name? Markussep 20:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Correction, the Netherlands are bilingual, take a look at Leeuwarden for instance. That does not mean that the article title has to be bilingual. It has nothing to do with discrimination or oppression of minorities. You must be extremely sensitive if you're hurt by an article title in wikipedia already. I did not remove any reference to the Italian name in the article itself, on the contrary, I added the information (which you removed!) that Capodistria is the Italian name. How can you expect me to respect your opinion if you completely disrespect mine? BTW I saw on Italian wikipedia that there's only 3.4% Italians in Koper nowadays, must have been a lot more before 1945. Markussep 05:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I feel it's no use trying to reason with you. Wikipedia is not there to confirm people's identities, it's there to give information. There are two official names, not one bilingual name. Period. End of discussion. Markussep 12:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Marco Polo
Please stop adding the protection notice to the article. While it may put vandals off, it does not protect the article – only admins can protect it. Please remove it yourself, as I don't want to edit war with you. Take requests for page protection here (as I already asked you twice, in the edit summary and my talk page) and warn vandals appropriately, and report any to be blocked if needed to WP:AIV. Thank you. --Majorly (Talk) 13:23, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- Please do not add {{sprotect}} to articles - It does not semi-protect the articles, rather it transcludes a message stating the article is s-protected. MatthewFenton (talk • contribs • count • email) 13:40, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- I've answered. The vandalism shall be stopped. I beg you you to contact an administrator. Meanwhile leave the tag. Please. It is mo more possible to go on in this way!!!!--Giovanni Giove 13:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)--Giovanni Giove 13:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
I would like to thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. However, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thanks again. --Majorly (Talk) 13:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Blocked for WP:3RR
— Nearly Headless Nick {L} 15:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] User notice: temporary 3RR block
The duration of the block is 31 hours. Here and Here are the reverts in question. Nishkid64 19:43, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] False accusation
This man User:Nishkid64...
You have been blocked for 31 hours for edit warring with multiple users on a number of articles. Consider this your warning. I have fully protected the pages in contention, and you will not be able to edit them until you agree with Factinista and Giovanni Giove on how the content of these articles should be written. Nishkid64 19:50, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
... claims that I was in edit war with you. As far as I know - it did not happen. Please, confirm or deny.
Best regards --GiorgioOrsini 00:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your honest response. I understand that we two were not involved into any dispute.--GiorgioOrsini 00:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Giorgio Orsini
Hi Giovanni,
I've left my note on the talk pages about Giorgio Orsini - as my response to the current development related to this article.--GiorgioOrsini 20:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Siderurgy
Please see History of Ferrous Metallurgy. This is as yet under construction, as I need to merege the steel#history section. I have chosen this name as Siderurgy is not a common English word; I have only come across it as French word (spelt slightly differently); no dount there is also am Italian one. Peterkingiron 17:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Useful
Thanks for the link--GiorgioOrsini 16:12, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your edits to Ivan Lučić
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Giovanni Giove! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but please note that the link you added in is on my spam blacklist and should not be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an Imageshack or Photobucket image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was genuine spam, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 14:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Please stop adding inappropriate links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and will be removed. Thanks. Shadowbot 14:38, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Please stop spamming Wikipedia. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing. Shadowbot 14:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Shadowbot 14:45, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- The above accusation is false. The user was asked several time, to tell which kind of spam I've introduced according to him, but I had non answer. I've also tried to suppose if I had, for error, introduced some wrong links. I've just rerverte some unsopported edits. But I introduce non new links! --Giovanni Giove 14:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Whether you know it or not, you were inserting a link to a Google Cache page, which is apparently blacklisted on my bot. The bot should leave you alone now, I've fixed it. Shadow1 (talk) 14:54, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Welcome!
|
I thought you might appreciate these resources around Wikipedia, as you never got a big welcome. Happy editing. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 11:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Marulić
It does not matter if Dalmacija was not a part of Croatia then--the fact is that Marko Marulić was an ethnic Croat who wrote in Croatian; borders of empires or states do not determine ethnicity. Marulić was a celebrated Croatian poet, if you check his page, it clearly states that he is a Croat. If King Tomislav was born in a time where Dalmacija was not part of the Croaitan empire, it still doesn't change the fact that he was a Croatian. Please do not let nationalism or any phobia of anything Croatian be the reason why you keep editing the way you do. --Jesuislafete 01:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Historical names
I added some comments on the talk pages of some medieval Croatian artist which worked in Italy. Please read them, because I think that that names of those cities should be changed for following reasons; - *1)under that names they are mostly know in english speaking world - *2)those names are the names that were used in that time period (Zadar is for the last 1400 years known as Zadar), Quote from [[2]] page; "Please, keep in mind that, per WP:NC, for the purposes of naming this article the names used for this artist by Latin, Italian, Croatian or Chinese-speaking individuals and authors (of the past, present and future) are irrelevant. Instead, we should consider only the names commonly used in English-language". Same things were talked in Klović pages, etc. We should stick to that deal.
-Also it would be nice that that articles don't have sentences like "now in Croatia" (because they were in Croatia and some time in the past), they were of Venetian Dalmatia in that time would be a better phrase . - Name controversy articles are preaty offensive for Croatian readers (those would be citizens in that towns) so other names under which somebody is known in diffrent countries is a more polite phrase. Hope this helps you coordinate your work with wiki rules. Ceha
Maurilic or Marulo is not Croat. He is Dalmatian. If you claim is Croat you have to tell why, because as a matter of fact: 1) he was not born in a Croatian state 2) he was not born in a region that was part of Croatia in a geographical contest (in the maps of the time you will find Dalmatia AND Croatia AND Slavonia. 3) last but non least he was not born in a region that can be considered 'croat' from an ethnic or linguist point of view. Of course you will not agree with this last point: if you told me why it's wrong, I'll tell u where u a wrong. Don't try to tell me again I'm a nationalist. You don't even realize how much nationalist YOU are In
1) What does it matter if he was not born in a Croatian state?? Neither were my ancestors, who were from Dalmacija In fact, my grandfather was born in the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. His father in Austria-Hungary. My other ancestors in whatever power was occupying them. Are you saying he is not a Croat because the land was not called Croatia back then? Borders DO NOT provide ethnicity, and just because a Dalmacija was not called Croatia, that does not mean someone can't be Croatian. 2) Croatia was dominated by various foreign powers since the fall of the last Croatian king Petar Svačić. If you think that Croatians lived on a tiny piece of land called Croatia by Austria-Hungary(that was divided so by them) then you know no history about Croatia 3) Marulić is recognized by his own Wikipedia page as Croatian. Here are other sites at the end of this that affirm he's Croatian. He appears on the Croatian kuna. Is the reason why he is called a Croatian writer is maybe because he wrote in Croatian and is considered the father of Croatian literature??
What you are trying to do is obliterate any Croatian connection from Dalmacija. That land is full of so much Croatian culture, it has given birth to many gifted Croatian writers and the development of literature, poetry, and the language; no wonder it is called the craddle of Croatian culture. If you hate being called a nationalist, then stop acting like one. I couldn't care less what you call me. Since Dalmacija wasn't called Croatia until 1991, I wonder why no other pages of Croatian people and intellectuals from Dalmacija before that period of time aren't called Croatian.
and here's that list I promised you. cheers http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9051198/Marko-Marulic http://caa.markovina.net/croatian-language-vol25-26.htm http://www.mcadams-croatia.net/biography.htm http://www.filg.uj.edu.pl/~wwwip/postjugo/texts_display.php?id=45 http://en.allexperts.com/e/m/ma/marko_maruli%c4%87.htm
p.s. Please, I really don't want to start an edit war. I hope you can see my reasonable points, and I can bring up more examples if you wish.
[edit] Hello
Regarding the changes in Giovanni Lupis, Elena Pucić-Sorkočević and Marino de Bona. I hope you agree with my recent changes with Lupis article. As for Elena Pozza-Sorgo I think we should go first with her current version name, it looks strange when you put her Italian name first and the article is named by her name in Croatian. As for da Bona I already made some points in my edits. Hope we can come to some compromise. Oh and also regarding people in Ragusan Republic, could we please avoid double linking? Like for example you again added double link for Mauro Vetrani, I don't think thats necessary. Regards Tar-Elenion 17:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh and as for names in Ragusan Republic article and people from Ragusa, it is really irrelevant wheter we go with Italian or Croatian since they were bilingual. I think it's better to go with the name of the articles in Wiki, we can always point out in the specific articles their other name version. Tar-Elenion 17:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Your edits and revert-warring at Republic of Ragusa
Please stop reverting and changing things without proper discussion. You are adding incorrect information to the article. Dalmatic is not a language and if you checked the link you would know it, also Ragusan was not a dialect of Italian language but of the same Dalmatian language. Second the official name in English is 'Kingdom of Yugoslavia' not 'Jugoslavija'. Third chakavian was never spoken in Ragusa/Dubrovnik, it's dialect was always been and is shtokavian. You have also removed several things from the article which are well sourced (the name in Croatian) and passages from known people. Once again, please stop or I shall report you. I considered you reasonable, don't make me change my opinon now. Tar-Elenion 21:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- You did a Revert war against edits. I went on with my improvment. I did an excellent and well referencied job. I have introduced all your observation. No problem if you report me. But you will to tell why you have done so many massive reverts, of several well referncied edits.--Giovanni Giove 22:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted your POV and incorrect edits. The fact you have so many mistakes (both grammar and false links) shows that your edits were not so "excellent" and "well sourced". Also erasing and replacing Croatian with "Illyric" and "Serbo-Croatian" as well as your "Serbian, Croatian, and the other South Slavic languages were standardized only in XIX century" (Italian language was also standrdized in 19th century) shows your true intention. I have looked into your history and I see that you have been engaging in similar revert-wars for a very long time now. I have reported you. Tar-Elenion 22:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Trentino-South Tyrol
If you want, you can cast your vote also in Talk:Trentino-South Tyrol#Straw poll. --Checco 16:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] South Tyrol
Please also check out the poll going on at South Tyrol. Taalo 00:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Maraschino
What problem do you have that Zadar is a part of Croatia? Why do you revert any edits that have the word "Croatia" in them and replace them with "Dalmatia" or "Illyrian" or any other euphemism you can think of just so Croatia's name will not appear on an article? You changed the Maraschino article so it specifically will not have Croatia's name next to Zadar. That is extremely biased and uncalled for. Do you deny that Zadar is a part of Croatia? --Jesuislafete 09:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- I repeat a furhter time: STOP WITH PARANOID CLAIMS. I've deleted the name Croatia just where it was not necessary. I'm not responsable if the present day Croatian official history is fulfilled of nationalistic propaganda and if some Croatian users want to export this propaganda in wikpiedia. Try to show where I am wrong. It seems that 'till now I was right in nearly all my edits. Best regards.--Giovanni Giove 09:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 3RR
plus edit warring. Rlevse 01:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)