Talk:Serbian Genealogical Society

Pov, spam, whatnot

This article is a pure commercial presentation of a website and organization of questionnable notability. I still didn't investigate, but it's likely it's the deed of User:SGS. I'll investigate who these guys are, and maybe list it at WP:AfD later. Duja 20:33, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

• I've got to disagree. I'm going to assume good faith. Even if I'm wrong on that point, most of the factual statements in this article are presented with neutral point of view (other than the last paragraph, which doesn't seem to offensive). I think it's hyperbole to say that it's "a pure commercial presentation". There's nothing wrong with acknowledging what services or products an organization provides, as long as it doesn't turn into a sales pitch or similar advocacy. Fluit 20:26, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Well I find it a little bit offensive to refer to the SGS as a commercial organization while its an official society with registered statutes (http://www.rodoslovlje.com/novo/showarticle.php?articleID=9). Which are non-commercial! Societies can't be commercial enterprises.... And also to question the reputation of an organization that has donated material to "your" national archives on numerous occassions. But hey, why not contact the SGS and the White Eagle. The board members are the same and some of them are in the Privy Council of HRH Karadjordjevic, or is he fake as well? Still didn't see any of this so called investigation, I am wondering how you will do this. Maybe you should try contacting the SGS directly and do your homework first. The White Eagle is responsible for the creation of the Coat of Arms today used in Serbia for the state and 99,9% of the cities. I think our reputation is valid. As for our entry, it is informative and is found usefull by many people.

I suggest the following. You proof we are false, untill then I would like to see allegations retracted. If there is something that annoy's you on the page edit it. Provided you have valid reasons for it. SGS 16:53, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

---

The article survived the AfD, and, although I voted delete (and recreate), I did the homework and found out that White Eagle is indeed in charge for Serbian coats of arms. The non-notability was not my main rationale though; I was annoyed by how the entire Wikipedia was flooded with links to this article, as well as most of the Internet. See Google searches for yourself: English, Cyrillic [1], Latin [2]. Except for Wikipedia and its mirrors, which eminent source (newspapers etc.) mentions your society? All the internet links are various business/web directories. And should I also mention WP:SELF and WP:NOT? I don't know whether SGS is so purely uncommercial (well, I doubt anyone would dig through dusty archives for someone else's surname for free, but I'll stop here), but I still maintain that you're pumping up your notability through Google bombing. So, I don't dispute the notability of SGS, but I question the way how the "operation SGS on Wikipedia" was performed. Your sole goal here is to promote SGS, not to write an encyclopedia. Duja 16:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

---

Still you didnt do your homework good enough. The SGS is responsible for the genealogical division of the White Eagle and there is enough information in the newspapers in Serbia about the White Eagle. All credit goes to them. You did question the notability (see your first post). The SGS offers membership for a low fee of 25 bucks in which we help members do research. We do not offer to do research for them, nor for free nor for a fee. Again you did not at all read the SGS website nor did you consult us before slandering us. We are writing encyclopedia because our site is holding more then 30.000 pages, 40.000 surnames and a hell of a load of Coat of Arms. If you are annoyed by our work and that is the SGS and White Eagle then it is your right, if you are annoyed by the fact that we are working on saving our heritage and that we are providing images, documentation(a lot used here on Wikipedia written by us but we let people use it for free on Serbian history) then so be it. It also very normal for any encyclopedia to have information on organizations that play a pivotal role. The UN is here, so if the UN and UNESCO has the right to be here then we have the right as well.

And as for the linking to other pages, I think we are in our right. The Coat of Arms of Serbia and the towns were created by "us" and we have the right to be credited for our work! Work you and others are using without giving credit.

Again, read through our site, our articles. We are non-commercial. The money collected from membership fee's is used to keep the site running. All our staff does this on a voluntary basis. It is clear and I mean this on the nicest way that you don't have any academic education/experience in the genealogical/historical world. Genealogy is being practised by many and our members do work for others for free! This is a well known fact in the genealogical world that is also very common with other societies.

As for the Google bombing, we do not SPAM we use legit META tags on the site and are linked with relevant sites. As for the allegation of "promotion". We stand in our right to inform people about the fact that Serbia's archives are dying because of lack of funds, we stand in our right to do our work for free. The only thing we want is acknowledgement and the chance to inform people through this medium so it will save them the time to look.

As for your surname Dujic: Its from Backa-->Can be found in archival sources from Kovilj 1776, Sajkasu 1797, Zablju 1885. Od hipokoristika Duja(Srbija 1455 godine).

Again, read through our site and study it first before you launch accusations. It talks easier, and if you feel to edit things on the Wiki then do so, but don't slander us. SGS 20:12, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

---

Huhh... again, it's not that I don't believe you. I admit don't know enough of your activities to comment (and I don't want to do that deep homework). I objected to the methods you used to get your site promoted here on Wikipedia (and it's the 1st Google hit for SGS now). This site is not intended for promotion of anyone's agenda however noble it might be. I'm willing to apologize if I made unjust accusations on other grounds (and I probably did, as I wasted an hour cleaning your links from every single page related with Serbian history). I won't object to restoring those in Serbs and Coat of Arms of Serbia (provided you provide relevant credits to White Eagle for the latter).
As for my surname, I'm not from that branch, but from Bosanska Krajina. Allegedly, the original surname was Novaković somewhere from Lika, and Dujić was taken after a grandma Duja, after the family escaped to area of Gornji Ribnik after some member murdered a Muslim. I heard it only through hearsay though.Duja 18:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

---

Well, you don't believe us nor do you do the proper research. If you were just concerned about the methods you would have said:"I dont think its proper to have this entry". Instead you slandered us and now we need to proof we designed the flag, Coats of Arms of cities inside Serbia. Who are you to question us about relevant credits?? You just admit not doing proper research yet you seem to attack us over everything we do. It makes me wonder about your agenda. The fact that we are linked to most of the Serbian history pages is because we run different sections on history, most of the Medieval Serbian history on Wikipedia has been copied from our website! If you check the website and check our sources, the books published by our members you would see that. I am done with this, remove our whole Wikipedia entry if you like. However we will undertake actions against our copyright infrigments then on Wikipedia. We will contact Wikipedia and remove all of our work on all sections. SGS 22:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

---

How much research am I supposed to do? I have other tasks here than to in-depth investigate who SGS are. I feel I devoted (more than) enough time to check. I'm not even interested in the subject to start the article. I raised my concerns about it, and I was overvoted in the AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serbian Genealogical Society. You were also free to defend your position there. I removed the link from all the articles. That's it. I have no agenda whatsoever against you. Again, I just objected to your methods, and self-presentation is not the preferred way to write on subjects here (WP:VANITY was the correct reference).

As for the copyright infringement, I believe you're talking about copy/pasting of the contents from your web page to Wikipedia articles by other users? If it were the case, I'll be happy to join you to remove the offending contents. Duja 21:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

---

I am not convinved, I believe you act on some policital agenda. If it wasn't then you would have used different reasoning and you didn't. You started with slander and prosecution and now you offer your help?? I am sorry, you did not provide any proper reference. But hey, if SANE can have an entry but the SGS cant then what the heck right. Dont you worry, we dont wish to waste our time with Serbian Radicals that want to endanger the national archives of Serbia and as far as you are concerned. We will respect your wishes and remove our entry, its not as if we need the Google hits most of our refers come from Yahoo. I am very dissapointed again in our people that lack the proper education and think the world evolves around them and don't look further then their own nose. I think that after investing several millions in the archives we have the right since we are a player, but it is types like you that re-write Serbian history to fit their own political needs. Wikipedia lost its credit with us, we checked some of your entries and fit it amusingly. Please don't offer help, you lack the necesarry academic qualifications. Have fun with your self satisfication on Wikipedia.

SGS 07:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, right. Duja 15:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

---

Because my collegue told me not to delete this I made changes to the so called offensive material. I also included some of the sources so people dont need to do their homework. Hoping this will satisfy the biased attitue of some people here.

SGS 16:00, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Copy Edit and Removal of POV Tag

I've no interest in the dispute between SGS and Duja, which frankly appears to be much ado over nothing. As a person who is simply interested in genealogy (but without any family history in the Balkans), given the current state of the article I fail to see how it is any less neutral than any other article. However, the article did have a lot of spelling and grammar errors, and a number of ambiguous statements, so I have made a modest attempt to copy edit the article. I've taken out any language that, in my own opinion, could seem to lack neutrality. For that reason I've removed the POV tag.

There are a couple of passages that were unclear from their context. I've included hidden comments in the text pinpointing those difficulties. Fluit 01:32, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, I was under the impression that people could edit on this way to remove errors and ambigious statements and that this was the intention of Wikipedia. I think what you did is more then fair and am gratefull for it.

SGS 11:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Article stubbed

Per a request on OTRS for this article's deletion, I have stubbed this article pending a re-write.

User:SGS: Please be aware that editing this article about an organization you claim to represent would be in violation of some elements of the WP:CORP guideline and WP:AUTO guideline. It would be far better, if you wish to continue to be involved in this article, to make suggestions on this discussion page and not directly editing the article. - Amgine 02:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

• This article survived an AfD and has undergone a lot of revision to make it compliant with proper guidelines and policy. From my understanding of the article, this organization is a non-profit society (or something similar), not a for-profit corporation. I could be wrong, but from looking at their official website I don't get that impression. As far as I could see, there was no reason to stub the article without any warning. Fluit 07:50, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
• I have now restored the article to the version immediately prior to the stubbification (to coin a term). Creating the stub (without a "stub" tag, I note) is somewhat contrary to the results of the AfD. If there are still POV issues (which I do not see), the POV tag can be replaced. The only reason I can see that was given for creating the stub was opposition to SGS participating in the editing of the article. Fluit 01:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect capitalization

I wanted to change the capitalization of this article in Serbian, but then I noticed they capitalize it this way on their website too. (!?) In the Serbian language, only the first word in such a name is capitalized. What should we do? --dcabrilo 07:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:14, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

English name

Is it Serbian Genealogical Society or Serbian Genealogy Society? What is proper English in this case (and others) ? Prinkipas (talk) 09:45, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Serbian Genealogical Society. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090920045940/http://www.ifla.org/files/hq/papers/ifla75/204-trifunovic-en.pdf to http://www.ifla.org/files/hq/papers/ifla75/204-trifunovic-en.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090920045940/http://www.ifla.org/files/hq/papers/ifla75/204-trifunovic-en.pdf to http://www.ifla.org/files/hq/papers/ifla75/204-trifunovic-en.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100201175421/http://www.royalfamily.org/links/index.htm to http://www.royalfamily.org/links/index.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 12:04, 8 January 2018 (UTC)