Talk:Josip Runjanin/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Josip Runjanin is not a Serb

There is no historical information who indicated that Josip Runjanin is a Serb, therefore even less we know about the origins of his family. It is a factual situation. Whether some source( book) called Josip Runjanin as Serb or mentione his family to be Serbian does not mean that he really was Serbian. For this reason consensus is required.

• "although there is no »information that Josip Runjanin would ever tell anyone or write that he is Serb ", and despite the testimony of" Runjanin's daughter Wilhelmine Runjanin, who claimed to have considered themselves Croats for their ancestors and on their father's side"Mikola22 (talk) 06:36, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

What is going on here? You deleted 3 references based on what? Your personal theory about "historical information". This is yet another Wikipedia:I just don't like it and needs a proper report. Grčević is a linguist and not a historian. He is also a nationalistic linguistic which labels everything to be Croatian, which can be seen from this very article you quoted. Not a RS because he is ignoring a bunch of other sources. We do not need consensus when we have RS. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 12:44, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

I thought you would provide historical information that speaks of him or his family as a Serbians and you didn't attach anything because there are RS. I have too RS for Nikola Tesla who is Croatian-American so I have little use for that.[1]. In this case, we also need come to a consensus because historical data which prove that he is a Serb does not exist. Therefore, this is place where we must come to a consensus by mutual agreement. Mikola22 (talk) 08:17, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Once again, you have no clue how a discussion or Wikipedia functions. I am note here to lecture you. Please do it yourself. You do not understand what a consensus is, that much I can see. You have been reverted by 2 fellow editors, Mikola22, and you are still shouting about some consensus. How about that? The Tesla article is a different story and the 2 can not be compared (a number of editors involved, years of discussion etc.). Show good faith and revert your edit. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 13:19, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

This editor (@Tuvixer:) probably didn't look here, you are familiar with mine edit and probably he will be. Let's start talking about Serbian origin of Josip Runjanin and original written evidence which support that. He cannot be Serbian or Bosniak or Croatian if there is no historical or personal information about that. We are all here to make this article as accurate as possible and now when I start this discussion you are not taking part in it. Let's prove something. For now what we know is this "there is no information that Josip Runjanin would ever tell anyone or write that he is Serb" and testimony of" Runjanin's daughter Wilhelmine Runjanin, who claimed to have considered themselves Croats for their ancestors and on their father's side. What do you suggest as an editor? To return his Serbian origin to the article? But we have no information about his Serbian origin.Mikola22 (talk) 14:27, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

You are going in circles while ignoring other people. That tactic will not work. Daughter's statement is not that relevant. Please read about primary and secondary sources. History is not based only on "original documents" and will not be (a great part of human history would be erased in that case). You have removed several RS and yet you wish that someone would talk to you about your removal, in order for you to prove that you were correct in the first place? Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 15:22, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

"there is no »information that Josip Runjanin would ever tell anyone or write that he is Serb" There is no information about his Serbian origin. That is a fact. If some source(book) speaks of him as a Serb we need to see on what basis. Serbian historiography and also partly Croatian(common Yugoslav history) considered all Orthodox to be Serbs. This is legitimate but Orthodox are not Serbs just because they are Orthodox and Croats are not Croats just because they are Catholics. It's not history. We need to have some proof that someone is Serbian. But now Croatia has its history and we have to stick to the facts here. If you have information that Josip Runjanin speaks of himself as a Serb you have to expose that data here. We are waiting for you. I see you called for help editor @Tuvixer: and I urge him to come here, until he comes you @Sadko: provide documents that speak of him as a Serb Mikola22 (talk) 16:32, 23 January 2020 (UTC).

@Mikola22 please stop engaging in an edit war, while there is a discussion. What you need to do first is to learn how to behave on Wikipedia. You are talking about consensus and You have already two users who are against what You propose. You can't simply remove sourced text just because You don't like what You see. Thanks --Tuvixer (talk) 18:58, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I will not waste much time on this discussion (although on the surface I agree that the sources seem to indicate that he is of Serb descent, but may have self-identified as Croat), but I insist that the words "of Serb descent" should be removed from the lede sentence per WP:ETHNICITY: "Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability". --T*U (talk) 19:34, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@Tuvixer: That you did that in some article I wouldn't RV your edit. I would come to talk page to discuss that edit considering that explanation was very clear. although there is no »information that Josip Runjanin would ever tell anyone or write that he is Serb ", and despite the testimony of" Runjanin's daughter Wilhelmine Runjanin, Then let's respect this fact. If there is no information that he is of Serbian origin whay you RV my edit? Now you have returned information in the article which is not true. You have a consensus for that? You do not see that there is no historical information that talks about him as a Serb. Runjanin was born to a Serb[1][2][3] family on December 1821 Show me historical data which prove that. There's none. Then why are you holding this information in the article?Mikola22 (talk) 19:39, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@TU-nor: I agree that the sources seem to indicate that he is of Serb descent There is no information for this, that this information exist they would be known in Croatia. Why these sources state that I don't know, certainly they are not based on historical data. That's what I'm talking about.Mikola22 (talk) 19:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

About your "historical data", see WP:PSTS, WP:PRIMARY, WP:SECONDARY etc. --T*U (talk) 21:26, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@TU-nor: I have 20 sources for Croatian-American Nikola Tesla will I and you put that in the article?Mikola22 (talk) 14:31, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

That is off topic. Other articles should not be vandalised because of someone's frustration faced on another article. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 15:00, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Why would I be frustrated, I give an example where there are 20 RS but still this information is not included in the article. Here we have information that Josip Runjanin is Serbian although there is no historical record to prove it. Therefore cannot in one article be some information and in the other not. And all have RS.Mikola22 (talk) 17:57, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Mikola22, TU-nor made you a huge favor when he pointed out in his last comment the rules and principles you should get familiarized with. It´s not that much to read so it shouldn´t take you more then five minutes, but it is really well explained and usefull. Perhaps you may finally understand why it is irrelevant what aome old treaty says when we have tons of secundary sources contradicting it. I think you knew all this very well, but you just choose what you prefer anyway, but, at least from now on, you don´t have an excuse not to have been pointed out how sources work. FkpCascais (talk) 19:35, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

References

" all are agreed to add the statement from the other source in the ethnicity section"

I see a very strange, incredibly fast closing topic on the DRN with the following argument: "all are agreed to add the statement from the other source in the ethnicity section". I do not know who these "all" are - I disagree. In my opinion, this is a fairly fringe theory. Are there any neutral, non-Croatian sources that agree that Runjanin was... I don’t know, Illyrian or Romanian, or what else have they come up with in recent years?--Nicoljaus (talk) 22:42, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

You should bring this up with Nightenbelle, Nicoljaus. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 23:02, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

I made a mistake and closed prematurely. I have reopened the dispute and I apologize for the mistake. Nightenbelle (talk) 15:13, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

It's okay, I approve of your desire to resolve issues quickly. "He that never climbed, never fell." Cheers!--Nicoljaus (talk) 16:23, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

RfC about ethnicity

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The consensus is clearly against inclusion, due to undue weight and fringe content. El_C 13:14, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

---

Should a sentence about Runjanin's possible Croat ethnicity be added to the article? T*U (talk) 08:15, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Background

I have been asked by Mikola22 to start this RfC on their behalf. There has been former discussions about it in the section #Josip Runjanin is not a Serb above, and there has been a failed attempt at dispute resolution at WP:DRN#Josip Runjanin. T*U (talk) 08:15, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Suggested addition

The section Life starts with the sentence Runjanin was born Josif Runjanin[a] to a Serb family on 8 December 1821 and baptized in the Serbian Orthodox Church of Pentecost in Vinkovci. Currently this is followed by the note Runjanin's Serb ethnicity, like that of other Croatian Serbs, is disputed by the Croatian linguist Mario Grčević, with the reference:

• Auburger, Leopold (2019). "Putovima hrvatskoga etnonima Hrvat. Mario Grčević. Ime »Hrvat« u etnogenezi južnih Slavena". FILOLOGIJA. 73: 150. Retrieved 30 January 2020.

The suggested addition is to replace the note with the sentence

Josip Runjanin did not consider himself Serb or Croat since there is no historical data who talk about it although Runjanin's daughter Wilhelmine Runjanin for their ancestors from father's side claimed that they considered themselves Croats.

with references:

• Auburger, Leopold (2019). "Putovima hrvatskoga etnonima Hrvat. Mario Grčević. Ime »Hrvat« u etnogenezi južnih Slavena". FILOLOGIJA. 73: 150. Retrieved 6 February 2020. nema podataka o tom da bi Josip Runjanin ikada igdje ikomu rekao ili napisao da je Srbin«, i unatoč svjedočanstvu »Runjaninove kćeri Wilhelmine Runjanin, koja je za svoje pretke i s otčeve strane tvrdila, da su se smatrali Hrvatima
• Grčević, Mario. Ime "Hrvat" u etnogenezi južnih Slavena. Hrvatski studiji Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. pp. 39, 134–136. ISBN 978-953-7823-86-3. Retrieved 6 February 2020.

Survey

• Oppose, per WP:UNDUE. T*U (talk) 08:15, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose, per WP:UNDUE. It seems that Croatian nationalists have been attacking this issue for decades, but outside of Croatia this point of view is completely unknown.--Nicoljaus (talk) 09:37, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose, per WP:UNDUE. After some consideration I think that it would be prudent to remove the note because it is the only place in the whole article that inadvertently states that Josip Runjanin was of Serbian ethnicity. The fact remains that he was born to a Serb family (and that should remain in the article) and that most, if not all, of his work and life was about and centered in Croatia. Stating that his Serb ethnicity is disputed, when the article only mentions an undeniable fact the he was born to a Serb family, seems ridiculous. So I propose the removal of note b. Also, this whole discussion about counting someones blood cells is quite disturbing and unnecessary. --Tuvixer (talk) 11:03, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
• Support because it is a very important historical fact which should be part of the article.Mikola22 (talk) 12:05, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose, per WP:UNDUE and I agree with fellow editor Tuvixer. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 13:11, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose this is clearly a WP:FRINGE view pushed by individuals with an axe to grind. The note was added and language tempered to ameliorate the edit war that was taking place at the time. Hopefully, reaching a consensus here will prevent such nonsense from recurring in the future. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 17:25, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. Grčević is a linguist, not a historian. His argument is more or less that Runjanin never declared himself a Serb. So, on top of being WP:FRINGE (rather than WP:UNDUE, I'd say), using this sort of reasoning one could dispute ethnic backgrounds of countless historical figures. GregorB (talk) 11:52, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Threaded discussion

• Comment: I suggest that the current reference is expanded with quotations from the source with translation into English. I could also support to lift the current note up to the main text, if that is a possible compromise, but I am quite happy with the current state. The addition as suggested by Mikola22 is in my opinion completely unacceptable. --T*U (talk) 08:15, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
• Comment: I propose the removal of note b, as explained in my Survey post above. --Tuvixer (talk) 11:05, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
• Comment As I said earlier for this I have no special comment. Josip Runjanin never declare himself as a Serb or Croat and this is historical fact, the only written and recorded evidence we have is from his daughter who herself and her father considers as Croats as well as the ancestors of his father. This is what we have from historical data which speak of origin and this new RS who talking about it.Mikola22 (talk) 12:18, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
• Comment : This similar conflicts are spreading troughout all the numerous articles which have potentially this nationalistic conflict included. Having started with Tesla and its consensusses, there is a sort of revenge contaminating other articles. I hardly see any major meaning making difference in Runjanin being Serb or Croat. I would even understand it from a point of view of how nice is that a Serb composed the national anthem odopted by Croatia. I don´t understand this need of all being "locals" (Croats). Developed nations usually don´t have this problems. I cannot remember any exemple now, but Germany, UK, or France, would not mind at all the nationality of the composer of their national anthem. All it matters is that the people are happy with the anthem and identify with it, ends up eing more important the capacity of a nation in choosing well a quality work rather then limit itself to some sort of tribal prides. I for instance write about history of football in Yugoslavia and I have no problems in pointing out the importance of Croatian footballers which were ahead and more developed than Serbian ones at the beginings. Rather then trying to distort reality and claim historical figures for themselves, nationalities should focus much more about the ability to exploit and take advantage to themselves in the best possible way when that opportunity came. We can discuss all day about Tesla, the fact is that it was United State that knew how to take best advantage of his skills. Same with Runjanin, Serb or Croat, his talent git to be best used in service of Croats and Croatia, by addpting his wonderfull composition which became the Croatian national anthem. If he was Serb, Croat, or Tahitian, makes no impact at all to the Croatiasness of Croatia by having his composition as anthem. I am not OK that we tolerate at en.wiki for long time now Croatian nationalistic editors with a mindset unable to understand what I just explained and, if nothing changes, will continue to spread Croatia and make Croatian whatever he gets his chance on to. A Serbian editor doing that would have been banned at very begining. We are faced with Croatian nationalistic sources which just make me sad to see them existing and having followers in what was once a beautiful part of my country. Insistance in claiming Ragusa as Croatia as in Boskovich article, refusal to acknolledge confirmed and undisputed status and borders of Croatia by historiographers in a desperate vicious circle that drives to an infinite list of claims of territory, followed by people born there, end up indicating that the editor hasn´t passed the barrier of understanding why is better to be a small Switzerland then a huge Sudan. Worste of all is that in most cases we are dealing with historical figures living in a space and era in which nationalities didn´t existed at all as perceved nowadays. All in all, in former-Yugoslavia related articles we cannot rely too much on local sources. Only if they are scholar and agreed by non-local historians. Local sources, including many of the even scholar ones, are often a disgrace in which one can find expanded claims from Yugoslavs going to Moon before anyone else, to claims of Tesla writting himself how he descends from Croatian noble families (from both sides of the family!). I don´t see nothing usefull here. FkpCascais (talk) 22:04, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
• Comment : As it seems that almost all are in an agreement, can I now remove Note b from the article? --Tuvixer (talk) 22:35, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 11:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Tuvixer You can certainly not remove the current Note b on the basis of the discussion so far. That is not part of the RfC question, and most of the participants (including me) have not commented on removal of the note. --T*U (talk) 20:22, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• Question Why are we even mentioning this linguist, Mario Grčević? He's not WP:notable. Why is he here? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 04:54, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Very high chance of Runjanin not being a Serb, in fact there is no reason to say he was a Serb

https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/qamxap/percentage_of_romanians_in_and_around_romania/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/p4trq2/percentage_of_romanians_vlachs_in_romania_serbia/ These two subreddits deals with various maps and these two maps show how not only Aromanians are close to Serbia, but that some still live in Serbia. I mean, some Romanians live in Istria, why wouldn't there be Romanians in the whole of Serbia?! By looking at the picture of Runjanin, you can see that he doesn't look like a Serb at all. Combine that with him never saying that he is a Serb. I mean, these kind of things get solved pretty easily on articles not pertaining to the balkans, but the balkan ones have to constantly be gatekeeped by overzealous Serb editors that only now how to counterargument in two ways. The first one is accusations like "you're a nationalist, so your opinion doesn't matter", and the second one is cornering the person by abusing wiki rules in a narrow context to bully them away from the article and continue their gatekeeping. I have never seen these gatekeepers us rules such as WP:COMMON to defend their reasoning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.252.199.174 (talk) 04:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)