Talk:1918 protest in Zagreb

Copyedit
I'd also look at cutting down on the "background" section as it seems to me that it's a bit too long in proportion to the coverage of the protest itself. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:38, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * "army rebellion" does this mean mutiny?
 * Yes. Those were quite common in Croatia-Slavonia in late 1918. (T)
 * "Even though the peasants understood republicanism as abolition of military and taxes – the October–November unrest set it as their ultimate political objective" Struggling to understand this sentence
 * I meant to say the peasants misinterpreted republicanism as meaning no taxes and no military service required from them, the period of unrest helped frame the notion of republicanism (even though they interpreted it incorrectly) as a political objective because no taxes and no military service appealed to them. This would later be exploited by the Croatian Peasant Party helping a relatively minor party to become the most influential political party among Croats - largely because it advocaded "republicanism" as opposed to the existing order. But this is only few years later on. (T)
 * "The State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs formally established its military on 1 November,... " the second half of this paragraph that contains a list of troop strengths and commanders looks like it could be cut or trimmed significantly.
 * Maybe. I thought it would be beneficial to know strength of troops in Zagreb at the time to give readers a better idea about the comparative size of the crowd in the square. On the other hand, I'm aware this is not particularly critical for understanding of the article. As you noted below the background section is a bit long and trimming this might fix two issues, but I'm unsure about this. Unless it is very problematic, I'd prefer to retain this information and have an ACR later where a consensus might form regarding this matter. (T)
 * "Zagreb's local authorities" does this mean mayor of Zagreb, Zagreb municipality or the like? That would be more clear
 * Yes. (T)
 * "carelessly and there were instances of provocative behaviour offending "everything held dear and sacred by the Croatian people"" I think this needs to be explained more what was offensive about these events. Right now it's very vague
 * I admit it is vague. This is what Horvat said and I expect it would be quite subjective so I tried to attribute the statement to him directly. For further development of the article I can only look for further sources describing those events (festivities etc.). I can only ping you once I locate this. (T)
 * "First there were brief negotiations" could be rephrased to add more info. Who started the negotiations? What was being asked for?
 * I gathered from the sources that negotiations were started by Kućak and Kvaternik, i.e. officers not really a part of either group, in an unsuccesful attempt to calm the situation. The sources offer no clue what was demanded by any party in the negotiations. There is no information on anyone drafting any demands in advance. (T)
 * "designed to increase anti-Serb sentiment" I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean so I removed it.

Oops, sorry, this slipped under radar. I've replied to few issues above, and I'll have a look at the rest shortly.--Tomobe03 (talk) 19:38, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Names of the victims
I do not want to step on anyone's toes and so I will merely suggest an addition, rather than make it. How about adding the names of the December Victims? Among them were:

Slavko Šćukanec, Sentmartoni, Miroslav Svoboda, Viktor Kolombar, Miloš Mrše, Mato Gašparović, Mijo Staničer, Stjepan Jureša, Josip Lupinski, Ferdo Veršec, Nikola Ivša, Dragutin Kostelac, Andro Martinko and Antun Tašner-Juričić.

Source: Dr. Rudolf Horvat, Hrvatska na mučilištu, Školska knjiga, Zagreb, 1992., (prijetisak), ISBN 86-03-00771-3, page. 54. ZidarZ (talk) 10:31, 2 September 2023 (UTC)


 * ZidarZ, Usually we aren't citing eyewitness reports but scholars who have cross-checked the primary sources and come to their own conclusions. Also, if you have not consulted Horvat's book directly and are copying what it says on Croatian wikipedia that is another concern. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  18:05, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes I have consulted Horvat's book
 * https://archive.org/details/hrvatska_na_mucilistu-rudolf_horvat/page/2/mode/2up
 * It seems that the much referenced book by Mislav Gabelica seems to be a bit revisionist in how the event is presented and who the "good" and "bad" guys are. ZidarZ (talk) 18:37, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * WOW - I see that my contribution of the names of the victims has been deleted - even though the information is from a respected book on the topic.
 * I thought that having more information is better but for some reason for you, less is better. Why is that? ZidarZ (talk) 18:49, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Angjelinović family
Is it OK to add info about the Angjelinović family?

Prominent family The Angjelinović family is well-known and important in the political and public life of Croatia in the first half of the 20th century. From her came the lawyer and publicist Berislav (a vocal fighter and known police beater, op.a.), the writer Danko (grandfather of the Croatian politician Vesna Pusić), the doctor Goroslava and the poet Smiljana.

Source: https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budislav_Grga_Angjelinović

Vesna Pusić - her mother Višnja, was born into Anđelinović family - she was the niece of Grgo Budislav Anđelinović. https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesna_Pusić ZidarZ (talk) 13:03, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Revolt rather than protest
In Croatian history this event is known as a POBUNA which means REVOLT. The word revolt aligns more with the nature of the event than does "protest". I think using the word revolt would be better than protest. Using the word protest minimizes the meaning of why the event happened. ZidarZ (talk) 13:06, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Angjelinović's feelings about killing the Croat soldiers
The Croatian language article has interesting details that should be added to the English language article. Specifically what was said after the massacre.

Angjelinović: "According to my duty, I thought I should be the first to start, and I am proud of those bloody hands."

Translation: Zagreb magazine "Riječ", no. 98. April 30, 1921, brings the speech of Dr. Grga Budislav Angjelinović in the Belgrade Assembly from April 26, 1921, in which he harshly attacked the Croatian right-wing politics, to which he belonged until recently, for reluctantly looking at the united Kingdom of SHS and trying to provoke new riots in Croatia. "If Croatia were to become Ireland one day, we will be gendarmes again," said Angjelinović. At that, a voice from the audience: "You have experience in that." Upon this, Dr. Angjelinović spoke about his actions in Zagreb and repeated in front of the members of the parliament what he had done in Zagreb: "According to my duty, I thought I should be the first to start, and I am proud of those bloody hands," said Dr. Grga Budislav. Angjelinović after the massacre of Croatian protesters against the establishment of Yugoslavia. Although he knew that it was only a demonstration, Angjelinović consciously wanted to spill blood so that he could brag in Belgrade that he pacified Zagreb.

Source: https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budislav_Grga_Angjelinović ZidarZ (talk) 13:11, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

What the protestors shouted
About why the soldiers revolted, this article says: "shouting "Long live the republic!", "Long live Radić!", "Down with King Peter!", "Down with the dynasty!", "Long live the peasant party!", "Down with militarism!", "Long live Croatian republic!", and "Long live Bolshevik republic!". but But according to "Hrvatska na mučilištu" by Rudolf Horvat, 1942, the crowd shouted "Dolje srpska dinastija! Dolje kralj Petar! Dolje srpski militarizam!"" (translated): Along the way, great popular indignation against Serbian provocation was expressed with shouts: "Down with the Serbian dynasty ! Down with King Peter! Down with Serbian militarism!", and they shouted support for a free Croatia, Stjepan Radic and the Croatian republic.

https://archive.org/details/hrvatska_na_mucilistu-rudolf_horvat/page/52/mode/2up ZidarZ (talk) 13:58, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

"Long live Bolshevik republic!"
The article says that the crowd shouted "Long live Bolshevik republic!". There is no reference given for that and I have never seen this written anywhere else. This Wikipedia article is the only place this is mentioned. ZidarZ (talk) 15:25, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

National Council
The article says "In the final days of the World War I, on 5–6 October 1918, political parties representing Croats, Slovenes, and Serbs living in Austria-Hungary organised the Zagreb-based National Council of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs to achieve independence from the empire."

Who were the "political parties" representing Croatian interests? Were these democratically elected representatives or were they ZidarZ (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Right-wing
The term "far-right" is used. Is it proper to use a present day term that has morphed in meaning to describe events in 1918? The words patriotic or nationalist are more appropriate. ZidarZ (talk) 18:33, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Fake quotes
This article has the statement "shouting "Long live the republic!", "Long live Radić!", "Down with King Peter!", "Down with the dynasty!", "Long live the peasant party!", "Down with militarism!", "Long live Croatian republic!", and "Long live Bolshevik republic!".

This is NOT the proper translation of what is said in old sources.

I improved the section with "and shouting "Dolje srpska dinastija! Dolje kralj Petar! Dolje srpski militarizam!" ("Down with the Serbian dynasty ! Down with King Peter! Down with Serbian militarism!". They also shouted their desire for a free Croatia, and a long life for Stjepan Radić and the Croatian republic."

With the reference to Horvat, Rudolf (1942). Hrvatska na mučilištu (Croatia in the torture chamber) (in Croatian) (First ed.). Zagreb: Kulturno-Historijsko Društvo "Hrvatski Rodoljub". p. 53.

User "Buidhe" has decided to undo the improvement. Why would an improvement that is properly referenced be undone?

If "fake history" is preferred here then where is the credibility in the article the authors and other "revisers"? ZidarZ (talk) 19:00, 2 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I am having a significant problem with user "Duidhe".
 * He has yet again udone my additions.
 * His last reason for undoing my additions was "A book literally titled "Croatia in the torture chamber" is not an indication of WP:RS"
 * Does this mean that "Duidhe" judges the validity of books based on their title? According to him the book "Hrvatska na mučilištu" by Rudolf Horvat, is not a valid reference for his liking.  By this,  "Duidhe" says that Rudolf Horvat is not a legitimate historian.
 * He educated me on "contentious topics".
 * As in a dance, two people are required for something to be "contentious".
 * If anyone is making this contentious it is "Duidhe" who undoes true facts to paint a false picture of events - a picture that has an anti-Croat vibe.
 * Unfortunately I have no idea about how to report the bullying that I am experiencing with this person. ZidarZ (talk) 22:07, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not the one who decided it's a contentious topic, the WP:ARBCOM did that.
 * Although biased sources are allowed in some cases, books with hyperbolic titles are less likely to be WP:RS and suitable to cite for wikipedia purposes.
 * You're welcome to go to WP:NPOVN, WP:DR, WP:ANI, or WP:AE if you like. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  22:44, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * You truly do not say much of relevance. You seem to throw out letters in the hope of confusing the other person and thus hoping to seem competent.  You are failing in that because you do not provide any direct answers.  The only thing that makes sense is that you have a personal bias and it is from that bias that you act.
 * Where does it say that the book "Hrvatska na mučilištu" by Rudolf Horvat has a "hyperbolic title"? You judge the title of a book written 80 yeas ago during a difficult time in Croatian history?
 * hyperbole : extravagant exaggeration
 * Do you understand the Croatian language?
 * If not, then what right do you have to judge me/us?
 * Who are you to judge that the title is an "extravagant exaggeration"? If you think that Croatians did not feel like they were living in a "mučilištu" (torture chamber), maybe that is evidence of your bias.
 * Maybe I made an error in my translation of "mučilište", which has a colourful connection to "torture chamber" but a technically more accurate title is "place of agony/anguish/suffering"
 * So, if I translated the title to "Croatia in a place of agony", would it be less of a "hyperbolic title"?
 * BTW - after a quick search, the book that you are "burning" is not "banned" on Wikipedia. Do we need "book burners" on wikipedia? - yes hyperbole. ZidarZ (talk) 23:09, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Who was involved in the revolt?
The article makes it appear that only soldiers were protesting and that it was some sort of armed uprising. This is not true.

I added " Many civilians, including women and high school students also joined the soldiers". Why?

User "Duidhe" undid my addition. Why?

Croatian historian Rudolf Horvat said " Zato u jutro provale sveučilišni đaci i drugi ljudi u zagrebačke srednje škole, gdje silom prekinuše obuku, te gimnazijalce i realce odvedoše na ulice, da u povorci manifestiraju gradom za novu državu."

Translation: That's why university students and other people broke into Zagreb's high schools in the morning, where they forcibly stopped training, and took the high school students and "realce" (?) to the streets, to demonstrate in a procession through the city for a new state.

Note: High school students = children

When you look at a picture of the event, you can clearly see high school boys and young men. All people in the picture are unarmed civilians.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Prosvjedi_5_prosinca_1918_MGZ_080209.jpg ZidarZ (talk) 19:36, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Missing critical context
There are questions about why the "protest" happened.

The root cause is the formation of the Kingdom of SHS. The critical aspect is whether or not the formation of the kingdom was legitimate. If the kingdom was formed not by a democratic process but by internal special interest groups and manipulation by foreign powers, was the formation of the kingdom legitimate? If it was not legitimate, then we can ask if the people, the wronged parties, were justified in protesting?

At present, the "vibe" on this article and the Kingdom of SHS article seems to be that the formation was legitimate and therefore the Croatian people are presented as the "bad guys".

I wonder how much of a role Ilija Garašanin and the Načertanije played and if that can help us determine who the victims and victimizers were. ZidarZ (talk) 01:43, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

"Prosinačke žrtve" vs "1918 protest in Zagreb"
I am confused. In Croatian, the event is known as "Prosinačke žrtve 5. prosinca 1918." which translated to "December Sacrifices/Victims of December 5, 1918". In Serbian, the event is known as "decembarske žrtve" also December Victims, as it is also in Slovenia.

Why is the English title "1918 protest in Zagreb"? There is a big difference between the Croatian and English titles. To me, it seems like an attempt at the minimization of the suffering of the Croatian people. The only place online that the event is called "1918 protest in Zagreb" is on Wikipedia. ZidarZ (talk) 12:53, 3 September 2023 (UTC)