Talk:Migration of the Serbs (painting)

Seoba

The word seoba could be interpreted as "moving to a new place" or "wandering".[2] In normal usage, seoba can never mean "wandering" (in Serbian it would be lutanje, tumaranje), but it means deliberate departure from one place in order to resettle at some other place. The source for that interpretation actually talks about Crnjanski's novel Seobe (pl. of seoba), in the context of which the word in its plural form might be interpreted as wanderings. But that's a poetical interpretation that, IMO, is not quite applicable to this painting. Vladimir (talk) 16:30, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey, Vlad. I've removed the text in question. No point overwhelming readers with footnotes and it's assumed the painting's Serbian title means roughly the same thing as the English translation (it was admittedly a bit redundant). If you've got anymore comments for improvement feel free to bring them up at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Migration of the Serbs/archive1. The more input the better. Cheers, 23 editor (talk) 17:46, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi 23, great work. I think I'll support the nomination at FAC, but there's a historical detail that could be better explained: ...whereby the Habsburgs granted the Serbs the same rights they possessed in the Ottoman Empire... referenced with Judah 2000. Instead of problematic comparison between the Serbs' "rights" in the OE and in the Austrian Empire, it would be better to explain shortly what those rights granted by Leopold I included. These were special privileges granting the Serbs ecclesiastic and educational autonomy (also exempting them from some taxes, but this may not be so important to mention in this article). It was not quite equivalent to the Serbs' situation in the OE. So I would rephrase that to something like this: "...whereby the Habsburgs granted the Serbs ecclesiastic and educational autonomy..." It can be sources with a short and nice explanation in this book, page 73. Vladimir (talk) 19:00, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

I concede that Judah probably isn't the best source for Serbian history before ca. 1800. After all, he writes popular history, not period-specific monographs. I'll include the above statement re: "...ecclesiastic and educational autonomy". Regards, 23 editor (talk) 19:32, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

I was about to support the article at FAC, but it seems that there are some unresolved issues with an image. Vladimir (talk) 18:05, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

The issue has been resolved, Vladimir. 23 editor (talk) 18:15, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Source

I'm not sure how reliable srbijuvolimo.rs is. Given this article has reached FA, the sources have to be solid. Is there an alternative source backing up the Igić assertion, VVVladimir? 23 editor (talk) 02:29, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

The website itself is not quite scholarly, but the author of the article is an historian, the manager of the museum of the SOC in Sremski Karlovci (Riznica), author of this large monograph, etc.; though what he wrote about Igić seems to mostly come from monographs about the village of Čerević (mentioned here). There's a novelized biography of Igić, but it can hardly be used as a RS for the article... Vladimir (talk) 16:02, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Models don't receive much attention in works on painters and paintings. If you find the addition inadequate, feel free to remove it. Cheers, Vladimir (talk) 16:42, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I've linked another source (Glas javnosti). It isn't ideal, but I think it's better than the previous one. 23 editor (talk) 16:21, 26 February 2016 (UTC)