Wikipedia

Talk:Aćif Hadžiahmetović

Latest comment: 8 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Requested move

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago24 comments5 people in discussion
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move; there's no agreement that the proposed is the common name for the subject. Cúchullain t/c 15:44, 8 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Aćif Hadžiahmetović → Aqif Bluta – Per the sources:

Comment - Since you wrote "per sources" please be so kind to explain why did you exclude Albanian and Yugoslav sources and based your request on the three sources on Italian?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
It wouldn't change the conclusion.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 16:37, 13 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
There is no conclusion of any kind about this issue. You can not base your proposal on 3 Italian language sources excluding thousands of sources on Serbian and Albanian language.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:47, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose -
  1. "aćif hadžiahmetović" -wiki - 2,790 hits
  2. "Haqif Blyta" -wiki - 1,190 hits
  3. "Aqif Bluta" -wiki - 34 hits
The "official mention" by Albanian parliament presented by nominator can mislead uninitiated editors. Novi Pazar belongs to only one Albania — the Greater Albania. Until it is eventually established papers issued by Albanian parliament are not official in Novi Pazar which is actually in Serbia. Here is a English language source which presents his name on official language used to write his name on memorial erected by official representatives of state, Bosniak National Council and Novi Pazar town. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Support. Actually not quite, Antid. The Google results using the search recommended at WP:UCN are Aćif Hadžiahmetović = 406 [2] Haqif Blyta = 415 [3] and Aqif Bluta = 39 [4]. But having said that, they are all next to useless as Google is a very blunt instrument. He's pretty obscure, and even without the requisite language skills I think it is likely that most of the hits are not about the subject of this article. Google Books hits are 2 [5], 1 (sort of) [6] and 9 [7] respectively. This should be about what name the reliable sources use, particularly those used in the article, but also other not currently there (ie those in the Google Books results, not the raw Google hits). While Antid's English source (www.balkaninsight.com) seems legit and should be considered, I feelconsider that the albeit small results from Google Books indicate the proposed move to Aqif Bluta is a reasonable one, and it therefore has my support. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 02:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Actually not quite. WP:UCN recommend excluding wikipedia when searching web, like I did. Excluding works from Books, LLC is recommended when searching Google Books not when searching all web hits.
  • Even after excluding works from Books, LLC the search results I get are different from results you presented here: Aćif Hadžiahmetović = 407 [8] Haqif Blyta = 380 [9] and Aqif Bluta = 33 [10].
  • Out of 9 GBS hits your presented here to support Aqif Bluta version only 1 is English language source.
  • Although Aqif Bluta version is the least used you supported it because you "feel that the albeit small results from Google Books indicate the proposed move to Aqif Bluta is a reasonable one". Editors feelings are not valid argument for renaming.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:28, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Aqif Bluta is not the "least supported" it is the most supported. That is because what WP:UCN actually says is that "When using Google, generally a search of Google Books and News Archive should be defaulted to before a web search, as they concentrate reliable sources (exclude works from Books, LLC when searching Google Books). BTW, leaving out the "Books, LLC" part of the search string means you are getting wikipedia books. But raw Google hits are just rubbish, as I have already pointed out. I defaulted to the Google Books result per WP:UCN. The Google Books results in English were 0, 0, and 1 (ie Aqif Bluta). The fact that he is known as Aqif Bluta in Italian, Albanian, (presumably Serbo-Croat) and English sources only strengthens the argument for using that name. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 09:12, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Serbo-Croat sources also use the term [11], not to mention that even if you do include useless raw ghits (for Antidiskriminator facebook seems to be an indicator of academic use of a term) the alternative Aqif Blyta form which Antidiskriminator didn't include in his search gives c. 310 results.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 17:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Will you please be so kind to explain why did you write "for Antidiskriminator facebook seems to be an indicator of academic use"?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:37, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Can we just keep this on topic? It is self-evident that ZR was referring to the raw Google hits you have been using to support your opposition to this proposed move. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 22:52, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
@ZjarriRrethues: will you please be so kind to explain your derogatory comment about me ("for Antidiskriminator facebook seems to be an indicator of academic use").--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:02, 16 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Anything rather than actually respond to the question hey, Antid? Would you please be so kind as to explain why you refuse to stay on topic? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:09, 16 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Proper development of the article seems to be being impeded by multiple editors working in tandem.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:18, 16 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
That doesn't stop you answering the question. Google Books ahead of Google? 0, 0, 1 in English. Your response? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:22, 16 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • This is the first time you asked me this question. I think I gave a fairly clear reason for my position:
    1. False search engine results you presented,
    2. one English google books hit
    3. and your feelings are not valid basis for renaming.
  • The correct search engine results have the biggest number of hits for existing name: Aćif Hadžiahmetović which is in official use in Novi Pazar according to presented English language source.
  • Since ZjarriRrethues refuses to communicate with me on his talkpage I would appreciate and explanation of his derogatory comment about me ("for Antidiskriminator facebook seems to be an indicator of academic use"). Maybe his explanation can contain some arguments that actually support the renaming proposal which is until now supported by one user he canvessed to this discussion, not by valid arguments.
  • I don't really have much to add to that now. You are of course free to disagree, but I don't think you should expect everybody to be now somehow obliged to keep discussing this with you for as long as you are dissatisfied with it.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:50, 16 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Blahblahblah, your usual stock phrase when you have no policy-based argument. Good day. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:05, 16 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

(unindent)How Antidiskriminator came to launch such accusations against Peacemaker67 using as a starting point my mentioning of Antid.'s reliance to raw google results (which include fb posts) over academia is baffling. That being said, Antid.'s use of the talkpage makes it very hard for unfamiliar users to take part so I do hope that I won't be accused of canvassing admins.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:44, 16 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Agree. Antid clearly does not want to engage with policy, which clearly states that we default to Google Books, not Google. Google Books results were 0,0,1 (in English), so in fact, the only English source on Google Books uses the title you have proposed. I don't think there is much more to say, other than that I have struck out "feel" above, and replaced it with "consider" which better explains my policy-based view. I will not stoop to respond to the unfounded allegation that I presented "false" search engine results, particularly as they do not have any relevance. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Antid. explicitly disregarded core policies of article titles (WP:UCN), deliberately used raw google results including fb comments and pages and excluded from his final results searches that didn't support his "Oppose".--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:24, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

RfC: Iron Cross claim

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

According to Serb journalist Aida Corovi, Bluta was awarded the Iron Cross. I've attributed the claim to her, given that it's a quite extraordinary claim that I couldn't find in other sources. Given the fact that extraordinary claims (a WWII Iron Cross medal in this case) require extraordinary sources should it be mentioned as a hypothesis of the journalist or be removed until scholarly sources are found?--— ZjarriRrethues — talk

  • What is the reason for your concern? Are there any sources which contradict Iron Cross assertion.
  • Here are other sources which confirm this claim:
  1. Tanjug news agency
  2. Slobodna Bosna interview with Meho Omerović
  3. islambosna.ba quoting historian Antun Miletić
Is ethnicity of Aida Ćorović important for disputing of this assertion?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:57, 11 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
a couple of queries. Is Tanjug still owned and operated by the Serbian government, if so, what is its reputation for neutrality? In what publication did the journalist make the claim? Are any of the additional sources back-references to the claim by the journalist? Who is Omerovic? What is IslamBosna? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 22:24, 12 January 2013 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Peacemaker67 (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)Reply
  • Tanjug is state owned news agency which is as reliable as the sources of information they publish.
  • This website published information that Meho Omerović, a president of the 'Board for protection of human and minority rights' of the Assembly of Serbia said about memorial controversy:
    • "Kao i u drugim slučajevima, protestujem i povodom ovog čina kojim se veličaju saradnici okupatora! Aćif efendija je od Hitlera dobio Orden Gvozdenog krsta 2. reda, time je jasno dokazao na čijoj je strani bio! Pravosnažno je osuđen zbog toga", [Like in all other cases, I protest because of this act of glorification of collaborators. Aćif efendija received Iron Cross of 2nd class from Hitler, which proves on whose side he was! He was sentenced because of that"]
  • IslamBosna is web portal of Muslim Bosniaks (link which published text written by Harun Crnovršanin in the book "Sinovi Sandžaka" who quoted historian Antun Miletić)
  • SlobodnaBosna is another web portal which published text published in Slobodna Bosna weekly newspaper, probably written by Mirha Dedić.
The topic of this article is not the main subject of my interest right now so I don't plan to edit it or its talk page for now. I hope the above explanations helped to resolve concerns about sourcing of this assertion. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:05, 13 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Antid, your "concern" that I have been canvassed is wrong-headed and bordering on harassment given our previous interactions. What aspect of WP:CANVAS exactly are you suggesting ZjarriRrethues has breached? ZjarriRrethues made an entirely transparent and neutral request re: sources at my talk page (for which you kindly provided a diff) at 23:45, 11 January 2013, and I responded at my talk page at 00:44, 12 January 2013 (after checking my sources, strangely enough). I subsequently followed the link here from from the RfC page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Article alerts (which I check regularly so I can update new GANs for MILHIST) and made a comment nearly a day later at 22:24, 12 January 2013. Your first edit following my comment was to express your "concern" that I had been canvassed here, not respond to what were fair questions from an editor who has previously indicated doesn't have local language skills. Your wikibehavior is very poor. Please ameliorate it. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 10:53, 13 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
But back to the actual topic in question, unless there are contradictory claims from sources of the same standard (or better), I would say that the sources Antid has linked (and explained) seem to make it likely he was awarded the Iron Cross. I note the comment was that "he was sentenced for this" or words to that effect, is there a transcript available? I don't think in-text attribution is even necessary given the range of sources that support the claim. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:44, 13 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

(unindent)I wouldn't say that there's a specific range of sources, but Miletic is somewhat reliable although we should quote him directly.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 16:34, 13 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have only a very small familiarity with Yugoslavian issues (and no prior familiarity with this person); I came here in response to a feedback request. Since there appear to be several sources reporting the Iron Cross claim, and apparently no sources contradicting the claim, it seems to me that it is indeed appropriate to include it. I would suggest mentioning the Iron Cross earlier in the article, as part of his biography, rather than waiting till the very end. If there is a genuine concern that the sources are biased and/or unreliable — even more so than other sources about Hadžiahmetović might be — then perhaps the names of specific scholars who support the Iron Cross claim might be mentioned in an "according to" phrase in the text (including, apparently, historian Anthony Miletić and Serbian Social Democratic Party vice-president Meho Omerović).
Additionally, per WP:NONENG, I would strongly recommend that each footnote containing a Serbian/Croatian quote from a source should also include a translation into English, for the benefit of readers who don't speak this language (and for whom a text in Serbian/Croatian is unfortunately nothing more than a random and meaningless jumble of letters). — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 18:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
all good points, I agree the Iron Cross should be included and earlier. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:05, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Changes

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago10 comments4 people in discussion

Hello! Why have my changes been undone by User:ZjarriRrethues? His/her changes to what I have written render the article somewhat indeterminate and ambiguous to the uninformed reader.

Firstly, I slightly edited the introduction, in order to make it clear what type of rule we are talking about. Stating that he was mayor under "the German Territory of the Military Commander in Serbia" is a bit obscure and not how occupations by the Nazi army are usually referred to. The introduction should give a clear and concise idea about the historical context in question to readers of all levels of knowledge of World War II.

Secondly, writing that the "movemenet" of 221 Jews to a concentration camp was "allowed" is a euphemism that relativises the fact that these people were imprisoned and then deported there to be killed, and I personally do not think that any reference to such horrible events needs to be "softened".

Thirdly, not providing any information about who Aida Corovic is makes it sound like the statement was given by an anonymous person. There is nothing controversial about the fact that she is a civil rights activist from Novi Pazar - that is what she does and where she is from, and it provides important information about the standpoint she is commenting from. I deleted the "Serbian" tag as I am not sure she would comply with that, and since I am not sure with whether she would call herself "Bosniak" either, I feel it is best to evade reference to her nationality altogether.

As for using "considered" instead of "treated", I feel the term "treated" is better suited, because it implies that the Yugoslav army had the same procedure for all those who collaborated with the Axis powers, and that was - execution, no questions asked.

All the best, DigDogMarley (talk) 19:48, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I agree with your changes.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
I wasn't trying to lower his responsibility in any events, but used "allowed" as that was the procedure. The German military administrator of every area compiled "death lists" and the mayors basically signed them as a sign of pseudo-legality. Most like this one signed them and few didn't. Such local figures used the war as a means for the promotion of their own regional interests even if that meant that they would have to "turn a blind eye" to the atrocities happening within their territories.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 23:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Ah, a "small" price to pay for regional interests, when it's not your life on the line. I visited the Sajmište article when adding this contribution. Safe to say that passing by that area of Belgrade will never be the same.DigDogMarley (talk) 20:32, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
What? In the first place, he didn't allow it. No local tin-pot German-appointed mayor ever "allowed" the Germans to do anything anywhere in occupied Europe. They did whatever they pleased, and he did nothing or at worst went through the motions (so far as I can see from what is in the article), probably because they would just have replaced him, or shot him, or whatever suited their purposes at the time. Being passive doesn't make him complicit in The Holocaust, unless you can produce sources that say he was complicit because he didn't take a stand, FFS. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 08:32, 26 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

FFS? Is that a source of some sort? :) I never wrote that he was "complicit in the Holocaust", nor have I even mentioned the Holocaust or his legal responsibility, precisely because, like you, I am not a legal expert. However, the person in question voluntarily stepped forth to collaborate with the Germans for the purpose of regional interests, namely the establishment of a Greater Albania that would also include Novi Pazar (which I will add into the body of the article now). During his collaboration, among other things, the elimination of all living Jews on his territory took place. Therefore, we are talking about a voluntary collaboration during which grave human rights abuses took place and were facilitated by the collaborationist officials (for eg. compiling the list of Jews and other undesirables, locating, imprisoning and handing them over to German officials, etc.). WHAT might have taken place had he decided to protest or resist is in the realm of the unknown, so it is futile to deem him not responsible on the basis of a guess what might or might not have happened. Perhaps I can, then, also ask a rhetorical question - what would have happened had NO ONE in all the world collaborated with the Nazis but instead, resisted? What would have happened if all of Hitler's generals decided not to follow orders (their main line of defense in the Nuremberg trials, btw, and no, I am not trying to compare Acif to Eichmann), and hence "risk being shot, replaced, or whatever suited Hitler's purposes at the time?" All the best, DigDogMarley (talk) 13:17, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

How would you know what I am or am not? Frankly, I am not interested in the rhetorical. If you have a reliable source for your claim that he voluntarily stepped forth to collaborate with the Germans for the purpose of regional interests, add the material to the article and cite it. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:33, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
I have just added my own. It is also summarized in the IslamBosna.ba reference mentioned by someone above, but I leave that to them to add. Btw, why are you so aggravated, aren't we working for a common cause here? Best, DigDogMarley (talk) 14:00, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
I don't get aggravated, because this is WP, not the RW. All I ask is that editors back up their claims with reliable sources. If you do that, I'm happy. If you don't, expect to be reverted. Welcome to WP BTW. Interesting that your first edits are to a very obscure article. I look forward to seeing what other articles you edit. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 14:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

How is it relevant what articles I edit or whether I am new or not? I will edit articles that I have reliable first hand sources for. This is something I have sources for. What is the problem? Honeslty, I don't even get why we are having a discussion. Thank you for welcoming me. Cheers DigDogMarley (talk) 14:15, 27 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Albanian

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

I have plenty of sources that he was albanian why do you delete them? Kadribistrica (talk) 08:29, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

I have not deleted the reference to him being Albanian, except where you have included edits to change his name on en WP. If you can show that his common name in English is Aqif Bluta present them here, the RM in February 2013 decided the common name was the current article name, not Aqif Bluta. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 09:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Ok i understand now about the name wont change it . But his ethnicity if i can find references can i put it in the articel???And would u delete it?? Kadribistrica (talk) 11:06, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

[1] [2] [3]

Reference that he was albanian. Can i use it peacemaker?? Kadribistrica (talk) 12:49, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

I wouldn't delete it, but there has to be better sources than those. Sources need to be WP:RELIABLE. What about academic sources, books etc? Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 01:05, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ http://www.zhurnal-ks.com/content/?id=1531114162754
  2. ^ http://m.telegrafi.com/lajme/sanxhaku-i-paluhatshem-ne-mbrojtjen-e-aqif-blytes-26-6538.html
  3. ^ http://botasot.info/opinione/325006/aqif-blyta-plage-per-serbine/
edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Aćif Hadžiahmetović. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:24, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Aćif_Hadžiahmetović&oldid=1204899029"