Talk:Croats/Archive 3

Revert of population numbers
I think this edit was in good faith, but I changed part of it back. The reasoning for the ~9 million estimate is because the sources state ~4.5 million Croats outside of Croatia and Bosnia, and figures for Croatia/Bosnia add up to ~4.5 million.

I think, however, there needs to be more scrutiny of sources here. There are two cited sources saying 4.5 million Croats exist outside of Croatia/Bosnia, however, all of those individual country figures added up do not come to this number. 58.169.190.110 (talk) 04:17, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The final number of Croats worldwide (7 or 9 millions) ??
Can someone please answer this question; What is the total number of Croats ? 7 or 9 millions? I saw that it was 7 until some ip`s started to play with numbers but after checking the talk page I am confused. Can someone please clarify this? Thank you. Adrian (talk) 11:52, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * It's already discussed in this page: Talk:Croats, Talk:Croats and Talk:Croats.


 * Basically, the Croatian Emmigrant Adresary gives a gigh estimate of 4,5 millions Croats living outside Croatia:

"Accepted the fact that outside the Croatian borders in neighboring countries and throughout other European countries and the wide world, living as much as the Croats and within national borders. So, 4.5 million(bolded in the original) people of Croatian nationality or origin. This estimate greatly exaggerated, and since there are better options for determining the statistical, acceptable criteria to be considered Croat each person in the world that by law is entitled to Croatian citizenship. And such a person has over 1 million in Europe, more than 2 million in the United States and Canada, 500,000 in Latin America and 300,000 in Australia and New Zealand.(bolded in the original) Of these, about 25 percent speak or understand Croatian.

Croatia, therefore, not a state with the largest number of emigrants in relation to the National population, but certainly is among the countries in the proportion of lead. Today, it is important to estimate what percentage of these emigrants and their descendants held with the Croatian emotional, family and cultural connections, and what is the relationship between these Croats within foreign communities. Fortunately, in comparison with other countries and immigrant communities, we can conclude that it is really that great affinity between the Croats and their descendants created origin. There is a trust that give knowledge and sense of belonging (or a special relationship) with the Croatian.

Google translation of Croatian Emmigrant Adresary"


 * Also, some of the people giving the 6-7 million number have been persistently adding made-up census numbers to fit their numbers, so I don't have much trust on them. --Enric Naval (talk) 16:58, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I understand. Thank you very much for this clarification. That means my reverts were wrong (when I reverted from 9 to 7 millions) and I apologize for that. I have checked the 2 references that are present at the total number and one is what it seems to be a forum (which isn`t really reliable) and the second is a broken link. Person who found these info should repair this since we knows where to search. Greetings. Adrian (talk) 22:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Trying to reach a new consensus on the total population figure
The 9 million upper estimate has been established for a while now, but it seems lately a lot of editors are disputing the figure.

I also believe this figure is probably inaccurate, but we should reach a consensus before changing it. If you add up the figures in the infobox, you end up with a number of around 6.5 million. However, some regions with significant communities (notably the UK) are absent here, but without hard data it would be unprofessional to put an estimate of anything more than 7 million.

My view is that the infobox should give an estimate of 7 million - no lower/higher "range type" estimate like it currently has. And the second line in the article should be changed from this:
 * There are around 5 million Croats living in the southern Central Europe region, along the east bank of the Adriatic Sea and an estimated 9 million throughout the world.

to this:
 * There are around 5 million Croats living in the southern Central Europe region, along the east bank of the Adriatic Sea and an estimated 7 million throughout the world according to various census data. However, some Croat diaspora agencies cite a figure of up to 9 million.

and cite those sources from the infobox at the end of this sentence.

Any thoughts? 58.166.186.39 (talk) 10:34, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I also think this should be solved since the recent various reverts over this matter. I would`t like to speculate any possible number of the Croats, without a valid reference there isn`t really anything we can do except playing with numbers based on our personal estimations. My personal opinion is that there is somewhere from 7 to 9 millions (from some simple math), but that can`t be taken seriously. The 2 links that are present now are not valid, one is from a forum and one is a deal link. It would be nice if someone can present any reference regarding this matter. Adrian (talk) 19:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I have found an interesting book regarding Croatian diaspora after WWII link 1. Adrian (talk) 20:05, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that with the book I provided and this reference we can make a valid estimation about the total number of Croats in the world. link 2. Adrian (talk) 20:14, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * First book:

""It is estimated that 4.5 million Croatians live outside Croatia, although the notion of "abroad" has dramatically changed since Croatian independence from Yugoslavia in 1991. This expanded definition of Post-Yugoslav Croatian diaspora refers to those who migrated from territories emcompassed within the current political boundaries of the Croatian states from several geopolitical, historical, and administrative units - Italy, Austria-Hungary (pre-1918), Yugoslavia (1918-1991), and Croatia (since 1991)." (page 76)"


 * Ethnologue is about actual speakers of Croat, not about ethnics Croats or descendants of migrated Croats. --Enric Naval (talk) 09:21, 25 September 2010 (UTC)


 * This book suggests a total of 7.3 million. It's just a travel book, but it's better than nothing:

""''Croatia had a population of roughly 4.5 million (...) The current breakdown from the census is Croat 89.6% (...) About one million Croats live in the other states of former Yugoslavia (...) some 2.3 million ethnic Croats live abroad (...)", pages 33-34, ( 4.500.000 * 89.6% = 4.032.000 inside Croatia + 1 million in former Yugoslavia + 2.3 million abroad = 7.323.000 )"


 * --Enric Naval (talk) 09:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Hate to bring this up again, but the despite many an edit war claiming otherwise... the "9 million" figure is actually unsourced. The reference urportedly claimed to suggest there are 9 million Croats worldwide merely mentions a diaspora of 4.5 million, not a total of 9 million. To add these figures together is a synthesis and thereby counts as original research on part of the editor. Furthermore, the reference actually doesn't specifically state that the 4.5 million abroad are not already counted, to some degree, in the Croatian census. Thereby, you all appear to be doubling your numbers. Until a source that explicitly states "9 million" is added, I will remove the number and continue to do so. Good day. Soundsboy (talk) 16:29, 22 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.166.186.39 (talk)
 * I doubt that many nations on Wikipedia have a reference with the exact total number of it`s population but the best there can be done is to sum all the diaspora data and add it to the Croatian census of Croats. I don`t think that this is unreasonable even if Wikipedia calls this a synthesis, almost all nations at total number have this "synthesis". Maybe with a little good faith we can come to a consensus that is the most appreciative thing on Wikipedia, even more than some rules.Adrian (talk) 09:33, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * To be clear, I am not leaning toward any number, I just expressed my personal opinion that has no value here. I am just proposing to a solution that contain some kind of a referenced data, even if it is summed up. Adrian (talk) 10:18, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Can someone explain why the 9 million figure is back up with a second source that ...still... doesn't say 9 million? Soundsboy (talk) 20:26, 25 September 2010 (UTC)


 * It says 4.5 million Croats out of Croatia. Plus the 4 millions Croats inside Croatia it makes, hum, 8.5 million. (oops, it's not 9 after all....) --Enric Naval (talk) 21:35, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to have to side with him on this one, as per WP:SYNTH:-


 * Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. If one reliable source says A, and another reliable source says B, do not join A and B together to imply a conclusion C that is not mentioned by either of the sources. This would be a synthesis of published material to advance a new position, which is original research. "A and B, therefore C" is acceptable only if a reliable source has published the same argument in relation to the topic of the article.

We have a source saying A (i.e, 4 million inside Croatia), and a source saying B (i.e, 4.5 million outside Croatia), but we don't have one saying C (i.e, there are 8.5 million Croats worldwide). In order to keep the figure of 8.5 or 9 million up, I believe that a reliable source needs to be found explicitly quoting one of those figures.

If one cannot be found, that estimate needs to be removed. 58.166.186.39 (talk) 09:22, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Wait, we are removing the 8.5 million figure, sourced to a Springer book written by an associate professor of anthropology who specializes in Croats . And we are leaving in the infobox the 7.3 million figure, sourced to a travel guide written by a travel writer who specializes in Croatia. None of them say the total amount in the world. Either we leave both estimates, or we leave only the most reliable one. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:28, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I've removed the four unsourced countries from the infobox, as they were up there for far too long without a source. Also, I don't know how reliable this source is, but it estimates the North American (Canada, USA, Mexico) population of Croats to be anywhere from 1 - 2.5 million. However, it's probably better to use census data for these countries, especially the 2010 USA census once the data has been collated. 58.166.186.39 (talk) 10:31, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Guys i don't know where or what is the problem?You are removing number of 9 million.Why is that?The two links in first sentence is not good enough?Quote:"There are around 5 million Croats living in the southern Central Europe region, along the east bank of the Adriatic Sea and an estimated 4.5 million throughout the rest of the world.[22][23....Please look at the link 22 and 23...This two links are not good enough for you?Fore sure there is 4,4.5 or maybe even more people of Croatian descent in the world...But because of assimilation or other things they don't consider themselves Croatians...Just like 60 million Irish people in the world are not "pure" Irish...so number of 9 million is for people who are Croats,people who have croatian ancestry,and people of partial croatian ancestry...similar example as Irish...So please stop removing number of 9 million..Somebody mentioned estimated number of 7-9 million...Sounds reasonable to me..Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scrosby85 (talk

I have one more question.I saw that somebody put the link of some "writer" Jeanne Oliver and her book..By the way in her book about population she says next:That in Usa lives 1.5 MILLION Croats?!I'm confused now,which Croats?Ethnic or with croatian descent?If that link is the "proof" of population then put 1.5 million Croats in Usa instead of 420 000 which declared themselves Croats.Other then that she said 240 000 Croats in Australia,wiki link says 118 000.She says that 150 000 Croats lives in Argentina but Argentinian sources say 250 000.In her book there are no mention of Chilean Croats,Austrian Croats...What kind of link is that?And some guy told don't even try to delete this link.Lol i mean really...1.5 million Croats in Usa...I will delete the link...Or i will put 1.5 million Croats in Usa...Your choice.Bye Scrosby85 (talk
 * I'm starting to think that adding that travel book was a bad idea.... --Enric Naval (talk) 07:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Great, now IPs are edit-warring about unsourced estimates. You know what, the only sourced estimate that we have is that of "croats in croacia" + "croats in diaspora" = "total croats". And we both the Encyclopedia of Diasporas book and the Croatian World Congress giving the same numbers. If nobody can give a source with an estimate for total croats, then I'll just use the sourced figures that we have to make an estimate. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:48, 2 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I've added three days full protection following a request on RfPP, and reverted to Enric's version, as it seemed IPs were adding unsourced material. If the dispute's resolved before then, please give me a shout or request unprotection on RfPP. If semi-protection would be more appropriate, let me know too. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 10:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm trying this:
 * lower estimate 6.6 mill (from adding all the figures in the infobox: 6,596,894 croats)
 * upper estimate 8.5 mill (from the encyclopedia of diasporas: 4 mill inside Croatia + 4.5 mill in diaspora)
 * --Enric Naval (talk) 18:38, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Infobox gives a bad impression of Croats
The infobox here, one of the first things a reader sees, gives a rather bad first impression of Croats. There's not even one woman among the twelve famous Croats in the infobox, which of course will lead the reader to wonder whether the position of women in Croatian society is that bad? If there are famous Croatian women, and I am sure they are, I would strongly suggest making sure that at least 25% of the famous persons featured with pictures in the infobox are female. The current infobox leaves the reader wondering about how equal Croatian society is, and that is probably not what anyone wants the infobox to do.Jeppiz (talk) 13:31, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The idea sounds reasonable. Women such as Blanka Vlašić, Janica Kostelić, Jadranka Kosor, Ivana Brlić-Mažuranić or Marija Jurić Zagorka come to mind. I suppose the more difficult question would be who should be dropped from the infobox. I suppose the 12 people in the infobox should be balanced according to different historical periods and their fields, and in that regard I don't see why do we need both Petar Zrinski and Fran Krsto Frankopan as they are more or less notable for the same event. Furthermore, four of them are primarily scientists or inventors (Mohorovičić, Bošković, Prelog and Vrančić), four are artists (Meštrović, Bukovac, Ujević and Gundulić) and four are statesmen/politicians (Demetrius Zvonimir, Zrinski, Frankopan, Jelačić). I think it is odd that there isn't a single sportsperson in there, especially when one knows how proud of their sports achievements Croats usually are. Furthermore, the purpose of having people in the infobox is to present readers with people who they may already know or have heard about but didn't know they were Croats. In other words, the priority should be how much they and their achievements are known globally. With all due respect to Demetrius, Frankopan and Zrinski, they are not exactly household names anywhere outside Croatia, and on the other hand people such as Goran Višnjić, Davor Šuker, Goran Ivanišević or already mentioned Blanka Vlašić are more or less well known outside the country (judging by that criterion, Josip Broz Tito would probably be suitable candidate but knowing how much controversy that would stir up I doubt putting him in would be approved by many). That's just my 2 cents. '' Timbouctou 08:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I expanded 'Infobox Ethnic group' by adding some people from above discussion. I hope it's better now. Kebeta (talk) 19:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

You added Tito Kebeta, a mass murder. He shouldn't be at the same place with honorble Croats as Meštrović, Jelačić, Zrinski and Frankopan. But, I'll make a new picture inclooding women. (Even though, it was very irelevant to notice this about women, and nobody will ask about women position in Croatia, Gott in Himmel!.--Wustefuchs (talk) 21:53, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

And, I forgot to mention, to make picture of famous Croats in world as quality picture, then you need to find pictures of those guys, but pics must be in public domain. That isn't very easy. So... And only two-three women deserve to be in this picture... Sorry, but that is how it is. You can call Helsinki Comitee for human rights now, but those are the facts. And, one more thing. Someone said that people outside of Croatia don't know who were Zrinski, Frankopan, Dmitar Zvonimir and Jelačić, but also, I'm very sure that Englishman or a Frenchman don't knows nothing about Zagorka, KOSOR! (wtf) and brlić mažuranić (and she wasn't so good writer after all) --Wustefuchs (talk) 21:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Ok, those are pictures we can use:
 * Janica Kostelić
 * 
 * Ivano Balić
 * Davor Šuker

I think those are the best Croats in sports (ofc, with picture we can use).--Wustefuchs (talk) 22:11, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This is a difficult task... Here are my thoughts:
 * The list should be varied (fields, eras). Include at least one woman, even if it's a token presence.
 * The list should be geared toward a global perspective (i.e. a perspective of an average reader), favoring people that are globally recognized. (Davor Šuker "beats" not only Josip Jelačić, but Ivano Balić too, due to football having much higher global visibility than handball.)
 * Josip Broz Tito is controversial, but he is probably the most influential Croat ever and - in some parts of the world - the best known one. Whether that's sufficient for this purpose or not is anyone's guess. GregorB (talk) 14:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, for Germans (and Austrians), the most famous person is for sure Adolf Hitler, but they don't have him on their picture on infobox.

Famous, well try well known. More like infamous.

The most famous person for Georgians is for sure Stalin, but they also don't have him on their infobox picture. Same thing for Tito, I don't want anyone mention him anymore!--Wustefuchs (talk) 18:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, this would be a good argument for leaving Tito out, the only part of it that's missing is the one where you prove either Tito=Hitler or Tito=Stalin. And, at the same time, you're seriously suggesting that we add Ante Pavelić and Lothar Rendulic? Come on, you've just disqualified yourself from any serious discussion. GregorB (talk) 18:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * We should take this easy...there is no need to disqualified nobody yet, although I agree with GregorB. But, first we should decide how many persons we are talking about here. Wustefuchs sugessted 5x5 pics. I am o.k. with that. Any thoughts about this...? Kebeta (talk) 18:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

why not add a map similar in style to the one on the bosniack page.

Ok, you GregorB take a look a picture I made here. And if you see Pavelić and Rendulić here, then I don't know what's your problem. Second, It was a suggestion. And Rendulić nazi or not, was famous, same as Pavelić. Do you blame Tito for beeing communist? I would be first one to be insulted if we would have Tito together with other famous Croats. And after all, this communist muss-murder wasn't clean Croat too, not just becouse he was half Slovene, but he called him self Yugoslav, and he is on their infobox picture. He is famous Yugoslav, not Croat.--Wustefuchs (talk) 11:57, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Maps
There is a shortage of maps, there should be at least one or two medievela map(maybe of whole Europe at the time of the Crusades and Frankish empire), and a few latter maps (say from Maria Theresia times and Croatian-hungarian union). Also here is missing map of Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina which are most numerous of all the Croats in neigbourhood countries. Someone would take impression looking on that page that there are no Croats in BiH, and that a Croat history is very short one (judging from the maps). Čeha (razgovor) 08:44, 29 October 2010 (UTC))

Images
The article is swamped with images. Please read WP:Manual of Style and do NOT sandwich text between images. The article is in need of some serious repair. I'll do something about it myself in a week or so. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 17:09, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Infobox picture

 * moved from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Croatia

Ther is a discussion about picture inethnic infobox. I put this subject becouse some of you could approve our new picture of the infobox. This new picture should please all of us, and remain in article Croats to represent the most famous Croats (in World). In ther are few importaint Croatian persons: Dmitar Zvonimir, Zrinski, Frankopan, Josip Jelačić, Ivan Meštrović, Vlaho Bukovac, Tin Ujević, Faust Vrančić, Ruđer Bošković, Andrija Mohorovičić, Ivan Gundulić and Vladimir Prelog. Current picture is in public domain and it contains files that are also public domain. So, we need to make new picture wich will also contain files that are free to use.

After the sugesstion that we should put women to a picture, I added Janica Kostelić and Blanka Vlašić, and ther are also very importaint sportsman that should be added to "list of famous Croats". This suggestion was writen on Talk page of article "Croats". So, I added Davor Šuker and Ivano Balić. Picture of all of them are free to use, more correctly under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license. You can see my picture here.

Now if most of you agree that this picture should be uploaded as it is now, then say so; if not, then bring sugesstions here, and we can make a new one.--Wustefuchs (talk) 11:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

The people wich are world famous, and I'dd like to add, also are: --Wustefuchs (talk) 12:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * John Malkovich - Free to use
 * Štefan Banič - public domain
 * Slavoljub Penkala - public domain
 * Ivo Andrić - public domain
 * Lavoslav Ružička - not free to use
 * Lothar Rendulic - free to use
 * Josip Broz - public domain (maybe)
 * Ante Pavelić - public domain (maybe)
 * Marin Čilić - free to use

First it should be decided how many small images would contain a final image (Wustefuchs offered himself to make a final image - I am o.k with that). I suggest that the total number of the people in one final image should be at least 16 (now there are only 12 images). If 16, the images can be organized in 4 rows, each row with 4 images. Al least two new images should be of a women. Wustefuchs added Janica Kostelić and Blanka Vlašić (I am o.k with that too). Some questions that I have, are: Well, it's a start...Kebeta (talk) 15:47, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Should we have more than 16 small images or more? Other articles have more (French people - 28, Serbs - 24, Germans - 25...)
 * Should we include only ethnic Croats? What about Nikola Tesla, Slavoljub Eduard Penkala... and others?
 * How many women should we have, if there will be more than 16 images?


 * Serbs and Germans have 1-2 women. I think we should include only ethnic Croats. If possible, we could have more then 16 images (I would sugesst 5x5 pics).--Wustefuchs (talk) 16:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, now I added all people requeted from talk page Croats and from this talk page. I ordered them by birth, so our new picture looks like this.--Wustefuchs (talk) 18:14, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Do you agree that this picture be on our infobox in atricle "Croats"?--Wustefuchs (talk) 18:14, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, there is no use if two of us are talking about this issue, the others have to say something. BTW, I think that Goran Ivanišević is better choice from Mario Ančić or Marin Čilić. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 19:05, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I'll call other Croatian wikipedians to disscus. O. K. I'll remove Čilić and add Ivanišević. All this I'll do tomorow, I'm to tired now :) .--Wustefuchs (talk) 21:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

This new picture I made is 5x5, that is 25 pics of famous Croats. I think this is an ideal number.--Wustefuchs (talk) 12:18, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh yeah, Ivanišević certainly tops Ančić. :)

There is also one more (thoroughly shocking and utterly blasphemous! :) suggestion I would like to throw in - the inclusion of Josip Broz Tito. Two things: 1) as far as the sources are concerned, we can all rest easy that the vast majority of publications describe the person as an "(ethnic) Croat" (i.e. neither "Yugoslav", nor "multiethnic", nor "(ethnic) Croatian-Slovene"); 2) aside perhaps from Tesla (a Serb), we are talking about by far the most famous and internationally well-known historical person from Croatia.

In considering this issue, it is important to make the distinction between ethnicity and ancestry. Just a quick search should solve any objective arguments to the contrary. ''...etc. etc.'' I could go on like this almost in perpetuity... -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 13:12, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * "Tito, an ethnic Croat, held the disparate nations together in the Yugoslav federation by allowing cultural autonomy"
 * James Minahan, One Europe many nations, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2000
 * "Although an ethnic Croat, Tito opposed any form of political autonomy and promoted the centralization of the country."
 * James Minahan, Miniature empires: a historical dictionary of the newly independent states, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2000
 * "Tito, who was an ethnic Croat, skillfully pleased the West, without ever resigning his Communist ideology."
 * Rade Petrović Kent, Is it poor memory or Just one more treason?, L'AGE D'HOMME, 1998
 * "Tito was little more than an ethnic Croat."
 * David Bruce MacDonald, Balkan holocausts?, Manchester University Press, 2002
 * "Tito (Croat) being the supreme commander offered certain hopes to all constitutive nations."
 * Dejan Jović, Yugoslavia: a state that withered away, Purdue University Press, 2009
 * "...the Partisans led by the Croat Tito."
 * Lenard J. Cohen, Jasna Dragović-Soso, State collapse in South-Eastern Europe, Purdue University Press, 2008
 * "Ribar - Croat; Tito - Croat;..."
 * Michael Barratt Brown, From Tito to Milosevic, Merlin, 2005
 * "Tito, a Croat..."
 * North American Society for Serbian Studies, Serbian studies, Volume 16, North American Society for Serbian Studies, 2002
 * "How did Tito, a Croat, rule Yugoslavia for so long?"
 * Khoon Choy Lee, Diplomacy of a tiny state, World Scientific, 1993
 * "Tito, the Croat, was a traitor to many of his countrymen."
 * Anne Alexander, Nasser, Haus Publishing, 2005
 * "After the war, Yugoslavia fell under the control of Marshal Tito (a Croat), whose Communist government in Belgrade..."
 * Katie Wood, Cheap Sleeps Europe, Franz Steiner Verlag, 2003
 * "Yugoslavia's new president was Marshal Josip Tito, a Croat born near Zagreb."
 * Yahia H. Zoubir, François-Serge Lhabitant, Doing business in emerging Europe, Palgrave Macmillan, 2003
 * "After the war, Tito, a Croat, made a second attempt to create a viable Yugoslav (South Slav) nation..."
 * Wayne Bert, The reluctant superpower: United States' policy in Bosnia, 1991-95, Palgrave Macmillan, 1997
 * "He may or may not have heard about the hard-faced Croat named Tito,..."
 * Whittaker Chambers, Terry Teachout, Ghosts on the roof, Transaction Publishers, 1996
 * "...indeed, it appeared that Tito (a Croat) intentionally sought to limit the Serbs' clout..."
 * Lori Fisler Damrosch, Enforcing restraint: collective intervention in internal conflicts, Council on Foreign Relations, 1993
 * "Tito, the Croat metalworker Josip Broz who joined the Austrian army and later the Bolsheviks in Russia,..."
 * Nicholas V. Gianaris, Geopolitical and economic changes in the Balkan countries, Greenwood Publishing Group, 1996
 * "As is well known, the communists under the Croat Tito dominated the partisan internal resistance..."
 * Paul B. Rich, Reaction and renewal, Palgrave Macmillan, 1996
 * "More importantly, Mihailović was a Serb and Tito a Croat,..."
 * Richard Harris Smith, OSS: The Secret History of America's First Central Intelligence Agency, Globe Pequot, 2005
 * "However, Josip Broz Tito, a Croat and communist who fought the Germans"
 * Kristen P. Williams, Despite nationalist conflicts: theory and practice of maintaining world peace, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2001


 * In my opinion no more than 16 or 20 should be enough (if there are so many people that each image becomes smaller than half the size of a postage stamp than what's the purpose of having the pictures at all). As for the selection I suggest adding Blanka Vlašić (free image available at commons although it should be cropped), Slava Raškaj (I uploaded a fair-use photo of her but it is very likely that it is now in public domain), Davor Šuker, Goran Ivanišević (I suppose we could use the image used in his infobox and I assume it could be cropped for this purpose), Janica Kostelić and yes, Josip Broz Tito. It's a shame we don't have a usable image of Ružička, and there's also the issue of his ethnicity (he seems to have been an ethnically mixed bag, as is the case with Penkala and Malkovich). Goran Višnjić would also be a good candidate but since we don't have an image we could use Mira Furlan who is mildly known in the U.S. for her TV roles and is still considered a great actress in Croatia. Ivo Andrić must be in there too. If I'm correct that's 8 new faces, which should be 20 with the 12 currently used (that way 4 out of 20 would be women and 4 would be sportspeople, plus a bonus point for Slava who was deaf lol). I'd also agree to remove Demetrius, Frankopan and/or Zrinski as I don't find them impressively important or recognizable even by our local standards, which would open up 3 new spots for suggestions - but that may just be my personal opinion and I'll leave it to the public vote to decide. As for Tito, I'm completely ambivalent as to whether he was good or bad, but the fact is that a) he definitely was an ehnic Croat, and b) he is still regarded as a positive person throughout the world and is probably the most famous person from Croatia in terms of global recognition. As for Lothar Rendulic, are you seriously suggesting we improve the article on Croats by including a guy in a Nazi uniform? And as for Štefan Banič, he was neither a Croat, nor is particularly recognizable (I myself never heard of him until today and if you asked any Croat who invented the parachute the answer would be Faust Vrančić 9 times out of 10). Other people who IMO deserve to be considered are Stjepan Radić, Alojzije Stepinac and Vatroslav Lisinski. Cheers. '' Timbouctou 14:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Leave Tito for now, we give that on vote. As I said before, Adolf Hitler is for SURE the most famous German, but he is not on their infobox picture. Same for Stalin and Georgians, Mao Ze Dong for Chinese, Causescu and Romanians, and we know Tito was biger monster then Causescu (we can blame him for death over at least 100 000 Croats - most of forgiean and domestic Historians agree, Goli otok, and had our little Yugoslav Gestapo - UDBA. And, for now, leave Tito, he is going on vote, you agree?--Wustefuchs (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I didn't include Banič in my version of infobox picture also (and he invented military parachute, not normal one). Somebody say it is bad to see a guy in "nazi uniform", first of all, it ain't nazi, but Wehrmacht uniform, and it is bad to see a guy in nazi uniform, but good to see a guy in communist uniform? And after all, we all agree that Rendulić is out anyway.--Wustefuchs (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * 25 people is good, look just at Serbian, German, French etc infobox picture, some have even more.--Wustefuchs (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think we should have more women there, and more variety. So far, we have a lot of military and science people, which is nice, but we could use with more Art/Philosophy, Sports, and Literature people. I definitely think Janica Kostelić should be there. She is arguably the greatest Croatian sportswoman ever, and is known throughout the world. --Jesuislafete (talk) 21:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Kostelić is alredy added, you can se picture in link above. You just say who should be added from Philosphy... from Art we have Klović, Meštrović and Bukovac, from Literature Gundulić, Ujević and Andrić, that isn't enoguh?--Wustefuchs (talk) 21:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Kostelić is alredy added. Really? I don't see her. --Jesuislafete (talk) 03:37, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

She's here. You just could read text above.--Wustefuchs (talk) 12:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

So, you all agree that this picture be uploaded as infobox picture in article "Croats"?--Wustefuchs (talk) 22:50, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * How about voting on Tito? '' Timbouctou 07:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Vote with "No" if you don't want Tito in infobox picture, and "Yes" if you want Tito in infobox picture. You may vote now, and I'll be first if I may:


 * 1) No Muss-murder and communist does not deserve a place together with Gundulić, Meštrović, Klović, Andrić, Prelog etc. My main argument and proposal to others to vote no is this - Germans and Austrians don't have Adolf Hitler, Romanians don't have Nicolae Ceausescu, Chinese don't have Mao Ze Dong, Georgians don't have Stalin, Albanians don't have Enver Hoxha. And adding Tito will real show face of Croats to the world - commies. You appeled for ading women to change the "wiew of Croats", and adding Tito is good? Now, think good. This is not a political campaign. Once more, don't devide Croats, Tito made bad expirience to some of us, killed members of our family, some got prisoned becouse they were thinking diferent. If you realy care about picture Croats then, say no.--Wustefuchs (talk) 10:57, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * 1) Yes First of all, Ivo Andrić and Vladimir Prelog are listed in the article about Bosnians, which should exclude them from being mentioned in the article about Croats, they should not be at two placed simultaneously. As far as Tito is conserned, dividing Croats is a term that has nothing to do with putting a portrait of Josip Broz Tito in the gallery. Tito was a Croat in every way (if you consider the fact that he declared himself Yugoslovenian, then we don't have to talk about Andrić, Tesla or Prelog, because none of them have declared themselves as being Croats, especially Andrić and Tesla) and, his historical significance (despite the fact that he had some mistakes, but each and every person and politician did - for example Ferdinand II of Aragon, a person listed among Spaniards, who allowed the Inquisition to slaughter thousands of people; the numbers mentioned above are only approximative and should not be taken for grantes) is enormous for our history. My vote is solely based on Tito's historical significance, influence and world-wide popularity... whoever wants to read about him and form his own opinion should read the article and so research and not base his facts on approximative numbers, hear-say and the existence of his picture next to the one of Ivan Meštrović --Clockwork Orange (talk) 11:25, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - Tesla is out, Prelog was a Croat, and Tito is diferent story. Bosnians, they are regional people, like Dalmatinians, my self, I'm Herzegovinian, but still Croat.--Wustefuchs (talk) 11:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, Hitler has biger popularity and historical importance then Tito, I think we can forgive him few Holokausts? --Wustefuchs (talk) 11:41, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Whoa, lad! :-) Tesla should be out, like Ivo Andrić, and Prelog... well, he could be considered the "biggest Croat" of the three, but still... it is very dubious and it would be better to replace him with, say, Lavoslav Ružićka. Bosnians aren't regional people, but that is another discussion. Hitler's popularity is smaller than Tito's (I am not considering negative popularity here), but their historical importance is equal (he created a new Germany, although based on racism, xenophobia and extreme nationalism, he was a great orator, .../Tito formed the Non-Aligned Movement, managed to create a strong and independent Yugoslavia, he was also the only one to say "no" to Stalin and survive, and I think it would have been even worse, and I am not saying it was bad, if Yugoslavia was under the cloak of the Soviet Union), but the fact that Tito can't be measured with Hitler, as a person who managed to build a strong and independent state based on the most liberal form of communism you could see until Gorbachev came, is more than enough for him to be in that gallery. --93.142.185.19 (talk) 14:08, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If you ask me I will leave recent politics apart and my list will be as follows:

-- Las ta  15:38, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ruđer Bošković
 * Ivan Lupis
 * Marin Držić
 * Ivan Visin
 * Ivo Andrić
 * Goran Ivanišević
 * Janica Kostelić
 * Andronico Lukšić
 * Vladimir Prelog
 * Juraj Kolombatović‎

Hitler, exempli gratia, incidentally did not receive the Grand Cross of the Legion of Honour for any efforts in "preserving world peace", and was not knighted by Queen Elisabeth II - as was the case with one Croat.
 * @Wusterfuchs.
 * Pushing (ridiculuous) ideas like "Tito=Stalin" or "Tito=Hitler" as serious facts is imho faar more controversial than the inclusion of Josip Broz Tito in an image. Equating socialism with Nazism or such similar radical right-wing rubbish should not determine the content of Wikipedia in the slightest, or any serious encyclopedia for that matter (and yes, we know you are Herzegovinian :).
 * Hitler is Austrian, not German. Stalin is Georgian, not Russian. Just sayin'...
 * Yugoslavia and the UDBA are not equivalent with the person of Josip Broz Tito (I find myself repeating that far too often). Tito was, believe it or not, just one man, and just one politician in the complicated web of Yugoslav politics. To illustrate my point with one example, please note that Tito and his private life were themselves subjected to covert spying and surveillance by the UDBA and its infamous hard-line chief Aleksandar Ranković. And above all: the UDBA is NOT to be compared with either the Gestapo or the NKVD by any standards whatosever. Lets do away with ill-informed simplistic rubbish shall we?
 * Finally, J. B. Tito should under no circumstances be excluded under the explanation of preserving room in the image. At the very least there is really no contest with Prelog or Bukovac.


 * Further suggestions: Miroslav Krleža (probably the very best Croatian literary artist) and Vladimir Nazor (the first head-of-state of modern Croatia, among other things) - should be included before any other of their peers, though I am not sure whether we have free photos (Prelog, of all people, certainly, does not compare).
 * To sum up: Miroslav Krleža, Vladimir Nazor, Josip Broz Tito - else we can truly shed all pretense of objectivity. If no free image can be found for the former two, then we certainly have enough images of the latter. And please oh please, no more "Hitler" nonsese. :P -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 15:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * 1 I also vote Yes to include Tito. He is seen as one of the Allied leaders of World War II, and was the founder of the Non-Aligned Movement. His article is the second most popular Croat biography covered by WP Croatia (behind Mirko Filipovic, oddly enough), and was voted as the Greatest Croat overwhelmingly in a poll by Nacional (however arbitrary such a poll may be). He is certainly a controversial figure for some Croats, but is at the same time highly regarded by many others, and there are even fan clubs of his, as well as monuments to him, both in Croatia and abroad (which can hardly be said for Hoxha, Hitler, Ceausescu, and only to a lesser extent for Stalin). I'm sorry you don't like Tito, but it seems that he happened to be on the right side of history as far as the majority of the Anglophone world (i.e. readers of this wikipedia) is concerned, which makes him qualified to be in the picture.
 * 2 Also, in response to Clockwork Orange's comment in which he compared this to the Bosnians article, the hatnote on top of the article clearly says that the Bosnians article is about "the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina", e.g. not the same as Bosniaks, which is an ethnic group. Likewise, this article is about Croats (the ethnic group), and not about Croatians (citizens of Croatia). This obviously disqualifies Serbs of Croatia (such as Nikola Tesla or Rade Šerbedžija) or naturalised Croats (such as Penkala), but qualifies people of Croat ethnicity from outside modern Croatia's borders (such as Andrić). Also, I don't see why John Malkovich is in there (he's as much Croatian as Dario Cvitanich is), Čilić is probably unnecessary and probably unrecogizable to most people (especially next to Mario Ančić - and both could be cut in favor of Goran Ivanišević), and Ivano Balić's sport is virtually unknown in the anglophone world. I am personally not a big Krleža fan, but it is true that he is considered the biggest Croatian writer ever, so I'd support his inclusion. '' Timbouctou 16:14, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I find Krleža rather dry myself as well. :) Nevertheless, as you say, he's generally described as the "best we've had so far".
 * Andrić is a lot more controversial than Tito since he is actually claimed by all. But, once again, the guy was an ethnic Croat without a doubt. Stjepan Radić should also be in there no question. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 16:25, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I would also like to include: Stjepan Radić, Vatroslav Lisinski, Faust Vrančić, Davor Šuker, Ante Starčević, Juraj Julije Klović, Nikola Šubić Zrinski, Josip Juraj Strossmayer, Leopold Ružička, Ivana Brlić-Mažuranić, Tin Ujević, Ante Pavelić, Ivano Balić,....and many others. As for dispute about Josip Broz Tito - he was a Croat, and he is well known, the rest should be in the article about him. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 17:41, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments by Kebeta: - Like I said before, first it should be decided how many small images would contain a final image. User Wustefuchs suggested 20-25 and user Timbouctou suggested 16-20, while no other users had anything to say about this. So can we agree that 20 images/Croats should be in the final image? As for the persons/Croats in the final image I wouldn't change present 12 images, but add 8 more. My selection of 8 new images are:
 * 1) Janica Kostelić
 * 2) Blanka Vlašić
 * 3) Goran Ivanišević
 * 4) Miroslav Krleža
 * 5) Josip Broz Tito
 * 6) Franjo Tuđman
 * 7) Ivo Andrić
 * 8) Alojzije Stepinac


 * I would like to suggest either a 3x4 or 5x2 format of the collective photo, which would include these persona:


 * 1) Josip Broz Tito
 * 2) Stjepan Radić
 * 3) Vlaho Bukovac
 * 4) Ivan Meštrović
 * 5) Tin Ujević
 * 6) Antun Gustav Matoš
 * 7) Vatroslav Lisinski
 * 8) Ivano Balić
 * 9) Janica Kostelić
 * 10) Rade Šerbedžija
 * 11) Lavoslav Ružićka
 * 12) Ruđer Bošković

Regarding Miroslav Krleža, there is a permission to use photographs of him on the Croatian Wikipedia, but I am not certain that it applies to Commons, although someone could re-check that. As for Ante Pavelić, he is completely unacceptable as per his historical role. Nikola Šubić Zrinski, along with Davor Šuker, could be some of the portrayed (also to add Vladimir Prelog, Josip Juraj Strossmayer, Vladko Maček) people, although I would as far as 12, and not more. It would be pretty crowded if we had 16, 18 or 20 people there... we wouldn't see anyone with such a vast number. Faust Vrančić and Ivan Gundulić could also be some of the portrayed ones, although I would not be so brave as to compare them to Ujević and Matoš. As for Ante Starčević and Alojzije Stepinac, their role (Stepinac) and political and personal views (Starčević) aren't the best ones to put then inside the gallery... and as for Franjo Tuđman, we should wait for the verdict of the ICTY and for a better photo to appear. --Clockwork Orange (talk) 18:35, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * For user Direktor, Hitler was a Austrian German, mother and father are from Bavaria, and I ddin't wrote Stalin is Russian, learn to read.
 * Second, If anyone finds insulted with Tito picture then it should not be added. You like care for impression of Croats when ther was no women on the picture, but impression will be good if Tito be ther. You are not thinking normal, now, do what you wan't I don't give a damn anymore, becouse I can't discuss with abnormal people anymore. You say ther should not be Prelog and Andrić, and why? Who the f*** are the Bosnians, i know only for Bosniaks, and the title is wrong ther on en wiki. Bosnians are people from Bosnia, but ther are also Herzegovinians from Herzegovina like my self. Do what you wan't, my proposal for the infobox picture is Red star or flag of the Soviet Union.--Wustefuchs (talk) 19:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Why Serbs don't have Dragoljub Mihailović? And he got's biger popularity in Serbian people in Serbia, then Tito in Croatian people in Croatia. He is also "Allied" guy, and also decorated by the USA. Politics out - you know half of Croats will not like Tito on the picture, why are you doing this? For fun? LEAVE POLITICS OUT OF THIS!!!--Wustefuchs (talk) 19:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Dragoljub Mihailović is a war criminal, despite the Americans decorating him (the Americans demanded Hirohito abdicated, but when they bombed Japan, they let him stay in office...), and his popularity in Serbia is mainly based on negative popularity, which means it should be excluded. He was never labeled as an allied leader and that is the reason why Tito put him on trial after the war - he was a war criminal. The same can't be said about Tito. As for insults, a lot of people find some persona insulting, but still... I may dislike Janica Kostelić (I don't, but I may), still... that is no reason for her, a great representative of the Croatian people, to be excluded from the gallery. And you are the one dragging politics into this... if there weren't politics, there would be no problem with putting Tito in the gallery. As per Hitler, he was either of Jewish or Slavic ancestry... so, he has as much to do with Germany as I do with Thai people. --Clockwork Orange (talk) 19:49, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Mihailović done less bad things then Tito, and Tito is biger war criminal then Mihailović, for more deatails see Bleiburg massacre, Goli otok and smaller crimes against humanty.--Wustefuchs (talk) 22:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Relevans historiasns (such as Goldstein and Bilandžić) do not deny the fact that Tito knew about Bleiburg, but they also stress out the fact that he tried to stop the massacre, but it was out of his jurisdiction, hence implying it was a political decision made by the AVNOJ government lead by Hebrang and the others... As per Mihailović, there is no way you could state that he was a smaller war criminal than Tito... --Clockwork Orange (talk) 23:25, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Is that importaint? He knewd about it, but done nothing to stop it or to punish those who did it. That's even biger crime.--Wustefuchs (talk) 13:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Now, name the Mihailović's crimes... those are the most thousend people, while Tito, our great savior killed more then 100 000 people, those are post war crimes included.--Wustefuchs (talk) 13:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * And do I need to mention Tito is on the list of 10 world's top criminals of 20th Century?!--Wustefuchs (talk) 13:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * According to one very subjective paper... I've seen that list and it is, like your number of 100,000, extremely high and a rather irrational approximation. What part of: "He did not have the authority since it was a political decision", is not clear here? What could he have done to the Heads of AVNOJ? Nothing. Later, of course, he managed to get rid of those who were either Stalinist-orientated or were, in some way, enemies of the state. What Mihailović, as leader of the Chetniks, did is far worse, since they were his direct orders... I can't remember Tito giving any direct orders for committing war crimes... --Clockwork Orange (talk) 14:13, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

It is stupid to disscus "What could he have done to the Heads of AVNOJ?", and "I can't remember Tito giving any direct orders for committing war crimes...". Here are simple answers - you can't know, becouse you were neider, not part of the AVNOJ or close friend of Tito, so, you can know nothing. Serbian author Pero Simić has found document wher Tito and his chief of Conter-Intelligence Department of OZNA, Jefto Šašić order the elimination of all Bleiburg prisoners, that is all prisoners of war of former Independent State of Croatia, caputed Chetniks etc. The source is - Simić, Pero. Tito fenomen stoljeća and another book wich (with all documents and secret archives as argument) writes something new about Tito, what was a big secret to all people in Yugoslavia, his life in Moscow, elimination of concurents in Moscow, big money he raised for him and his kids, he was free of tax etc., and the book is "Tito - strogo povjerljivo", Zagreb. 2010. ISBN: 978-953-7313-62-3, and the authors are Pero Simić and Zvonimir Despot. Now, you are probably "The Child of the Revolution", so you didn't know or don't whant to know about those things, but who cares. Tito was a criminal, user of people, egoist and  Hochstapler.--Wustefuchs (talk) 15:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * And again that primitive deduction... everyone who defends Tito is a "Child of the Revolution" and Enemy of the State"... and those who attack him are true "patriots"... of course, that is primitive, but what can a man do except to cope with it and deny it constantly. As far as those books are concerned, we should be discussing the sources themselves and how those authors and books are reliable... I have heard about both of them and the only thing that I have to say is that I wouldn't trust "historical" books published along newspapers as I would historical books written by relevant historians (i.e. Ivo and Slavko Goldstein) who do claim that Tito, after he came to power, did everything to pardon all of the war criminals and their families, former Ustaša and Domobrans, including the Amnesty Law of 1947, thereby releasing all former Ustaša and Domobrans from prison, pardoning them for their role inside the Independent State of Croatia. --Clockwork Orange (talk) 17:08, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I will not decide who's right, Goldstein or Simić, neither will you. I'm just a student of history, I'm not historian, and I think neither are you (as I got impression, correct me if I'm wrong). Primitive or not, that's not even importaint. This discussion about Tito can last for years, and that should not be disscused here. The real disscusion was should Tito have his picture alongside with other famous Croats. I think you and I have made a point - no! This "small" disscusion is very big argument for that.--Wustefuchs (talk) 17:42, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

And please, do read Simić's book, wher he shows his proofs for things he wrote, and those proofs are very credible, bealive me, you can read book your self and you will say the same thing. And if you achive to proof Simić is wrong, and documents he shows are forgery, then, my friend, do a scientific work and publish it, but until then, ther's nothing you can do about it.--Wustefuchs (talk) 17:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

All I am telling you is that the circumstances surrounding Simić's book, the details, the time period and the book in general are a little.... fishy, so to say, but there is no dispute that historians such as Goldstein can't even be compares to Simić, as they are at least one level above such persona. I am also not discussing whether Tito is a positive or negative historical figure (but you are the one that dragged politics into this - "Children of the Revolution", division of Croats and such nonsense), I am just saying that his historical importance is vast and... important enough for him to be portrayed in the gallery of famous and significant Croats :-) --Clockwork Orange (talk) 20:09, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * And we are back on the Hitler, Causescu and other chaps... :/ this is pointless.--Wustefuchs (talk) 21:41, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No, we're not... you are mentioning them... comparing Hitler and Nicolae with Tito is pointless --Clockwork Orange (talk) 21:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Wusterfuchs opposes this for reasons of pure personal political preferences. His ideas echo the most ill-informed and non-realistic variant of extreme right-wing propaganda you could find in the Balkans, and should simply be ignored. With perhaps the exception of Wusterfuchs' region of Herzegovina :), Tito is generally not viewed in the international community as any sort of "criminal". He is viewed as a socialist strong-man, but a popular and (relatively) non-oppressive one (along the lines of Fidel Castro and Ho Chi Minh e.g. - perhaps even more, as he was very friendly with the West indeed).


 * We are talking about one of the most internationally lauded and decorated persons (let alone Croats) in history, who made the cover of Time Magazine on no less than four or five occasions. The guy was the most influential person in forimng the third neutral block in the Cold War, one of the leaders of Cold War diplomacy. We are quite probably talking about the most internationally well known Croat in history - there can be no serious question of the fellow's inclusion.


 * Clockwork Orange, notice also that Wusterfuchs' conception of the "Croatian Hitler" is rather warped. That title is already taken without contest by the fascist dictator of Croatia, Ante Pavelić, known as the "Croatian Fuhrer" - with the silly title to go with it ("Fuhrer", "Duce", "Poglavnik"). Not to worry Wusterfuchs, the Croatian equivalent of Hitler will certainly not be included. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 11:02, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Direktor, you are speaking stupid things. Dragoljub Mihailović also was on the Time magazin (is that condition for beeing on infobox picture?). And, my political wiew is really importaint? You say right-wing is less educated then advenced left-wing? You are speaking rubish. And, do not vory my Director, Croatian Hitler won't be included, but neither will be our version of Stalin. Regards.--Wustefuchs (talk) 11:29, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

So was Hitler, but the two mentioned (meaning Draža and Hitler) have only been there once mainly because the Americans were pretty naive when it came to such things. Putting a person 4 or 5 times on the cover of Time isn't a coincidence or a historical error, as it might have been with Hitler and Draža. Yes, your political views are extremely important here because they were your main thesis and arguments when opposing the selection of Tito for the gallery... alluding that some of us may be "advanced left-wingers" is again an example of primitivism that comes from the Balkans (as I myself am from Croatia)... each and every one who speaks positively of Tito is a left-winger and an enemy of the state, despite his own political and personal ideals and affiliations, but isn't that the same method Stalin used? You oppose me, or you speak positively of my enemies... you're done... it could be summarized like that, meaning you are practicing the same politics you oppose. And, by no means is Tito a Croatian version of Stalin, be realistic my dear colleague, as we both as students of History should know the fact that Stalin killed more than 20,000,000 people in the period between 1945 and 1953, which is a span of 8 years (and I am not mentioning the people "eliminated" from 1924 - 1945)... during Tito's reign (and I am implying here that he was not the "executioner" of all those "eliminations")... what was the number? It wasn't even 100,000... do divide and see the difference before you compare people like that. Regards --Clockwork Orange (talk) 13:33, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Summary
The discussion about the infobox image seems to have evolved into a debate about Tito's merits and we do not seem any closer to reaching a solution for the original problem (which was about having too few women in the infobox). I tried to summarize all the points and issues which came up during the discussion so that we can have a neat overview and hopefully reach a conclusion in the near future:

1. Quantity
This regards the number of pictures which should be included in the infobox image. (for a idea what a certain number may look like you may want to take a look at the articles about Serbs (24 images, 6x4), French people (27 images, 9x3), Italian people (20 images, 4x5), Germans (25 images, 5x5)) or Basque people (28 images, 7x4). The current proposals are as follows:
 * Wustefuchs suggested 20 or 25
 * Timbouctou suggested 16 to 20
 * Kebeta suggested 20
 * Clockwork Orange suggested "either 12 or 15, meaning 4x3 or 5x3"
 * Ali Pasha suggested 8 (2×4)
 * DIREKTOR suggested 12 (3x4) or 15 (3x5)


 * As of 7 November, the suggestions listed above are the best ideas we've managed to come up with. It seems that an average of all numbers thrown around is 16.3, and I will boldly try to speed up the process by putting up the numbers 16 and 20 up for vote.
 * In case we decide on 16, the fnal cut would then be composed of 3 top-voted people in each of the four areas (which gives 12) plus four people across the board who received the most votes (currently that would be Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog, Jelačić, Radić, Tito, Gundulić, Meštrović, Bukovac, Kostelić, Vlašić, Petrović, Stepinac, King Tomislav, Andrić and Ivana Brlić-Mažuranić).
 * If 20 is the chosen number than top 4 out of each category would make it plus the additional four most-voted people (currently that would be Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog, F. Vrančić, Jelačić, Radić, Tito, King Tomislav, Gundulić, Meštrović, Bukovac, Andrić, Kostelić, Vlašić, Petrović, Ivanišević, Stepinac, Ivana Brlić-Mažuranić, and Šuker/N.Š. Zrinski).

Of course, these numbers are subject to change, and the issue of freely licensed images can also be expected to come into play and mess up our choice. Regardless, I ask you to vote once more below this comment and state your preference for either 16 or 20 pictures in the final image. On 10 November it will be three weeks since we started the voting process and I would like to wrap this up in the near future so we can get this matter off our to-do lists, so I'll set a date for Sunday, 14 November. This gives everyone five more days from now to revise your votes, invite friends, express your opinions, etc. Whatever is on the board on Sunday at midnight will be considered as the final result. Oh and btw I vote for 16 purely for practical reasons. '' Timbouctou 23:10, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

2. Selection
This is obviously the most contrversial part. Several users said that the selection should be balanced (by era and by area) and that at least 1 or 2 women whould be included. Perhaps it would be best to first divide candidates by their area (e.g. the primary area by which they are famous). Since most numbers usually discussed can be divided by 4 or 5 I suggest grouping candidates in four major areas (arts, science, politics, sports), plus an extra 5th, and by voting we could easily get down to 3-4 candidates per group. If the number of images we decide on is 16 or 20 then we could use top 4-5 candidates from each area and scrap the 5th column altogether. If the number is more than 20, or if freely licensed images are unavailable to use for top-ranked choices, candidates from the 5th group would fill in the remaining spots.

As I said earlier, the only criteria required should be people's ethnicity, as the article deals with Croats (ethnic group). This excludes all Croatian people who are not ethnic Croats, but can include famous Croats from outside the borders of modern Croatia. Any debate on who is a Croat looks like a waste of time from the outset, so let us just limit the criteria to people who are considered Croats beyond reasonable doubt.

I've listed here all the people who are in the currently used image, plus everyone who was mentioned during the discussion. The ones which are currently used are listed in bold. For the time being the extra column is for people who don't fit into any of the 4 categories. Once the voting starts people who we decide should be included but fail to make top 3-4 in their respective areas will also go there.

I urge everyone to vote again for their favourites, bearing in mind the balanced nature of the list. Ideally, everyone should pick 3 or 4 people from each area plus 3 or 4 extra candidates from any field or era. When voting, do not edit the list - I will update the list as voting takes place below with numbers of votes shown in brackets next to candidates' names, and include new candidates mentioned during the voting. Please keep your answers as short as possible to make tallying practical.

Update: Since it seems that most people who wanted to do so have voted in the past 20 days or so since the voting started, I suggest we wrap this up by Sunday, 14 November, five days from now. I presume this gives everyone who hasn't voted by now enough time to make their voice heard. Whatever the standings are on Sunday, it will be accepted as the final vote. For what will happen after that, see section above. Best regards. '' Timbouctou 23:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Update 2: Below are the final results. '' Timbouctou 13:43, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Tally updated on 16 November after 15 editors (Timbouctou, Clockwork Orange, Wustefuchs, Thewanderer, Kebeta, Direktor, Dr. Vicodine, Ali Pasha, Vodomar, Croq, Čeha, Tomobe03, A-ciha, Kennechten and Tty29a) had voted. Previously included votes from an anonymous editor who has been indefinitely blocked for an unrelated matter were removed. Candidates with the same number of votes are listed in no particular order.

Voting area
(Each voter should submit a minimum of 12 people (three each from Arts, Science, Politics and Sports). Additional names regardless of their background are also allowed, so long as the total number does not exceed 20.)


 * Science - Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog; Politics - Jelačić, Tito, Radić; Arts - Meštrović, Gundulić, Andrić; Sports - Ivanišević, Vlašić, Šuker; Extras - Slava Raškaj, Lisinski, Faust Vrančić '' Timbouctou 11:57, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Science: Bošković, Mohorovičić, Ružićka; Politics: Jelačić, Tito, Radić; Arts: Raškaj, Krleža, Meštrović, Ujević, Matoš, Lisinski, Bukovac; Sports: Balić, Kostelić, Vlašić; Extras: Strossmayer --Clockwork Orange (talk) 13:20, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Science: Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog, Juan Vučetić (fingerprints), Soljačić; Politics: Demitrius Zvonimir, Petar Zrinski, F. K. Frankopan, Josip Jelačić, Stjepan Radić; Arts: Ivan Meštrović, Vlaho Bukovac, Tin Ujević, Ivan Gundulić, Ivo Andrić, Juraj Klović; Sports:Janica Kostelić, Blanka Vlaišić, Ivano Balić, Mario Ančić, Marin Čilić;Extras:Alojzije Stepinac--Wustefuchs (talk) 15:00, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've removed your addition of Juan Vicetich as he is already listed as Ivan Vučetić. I've also added Soljačić to the list, but he has no votes as you added him as your 21st candidate. '' Timbouctou 17:17, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Science: Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog; Politics: Petar Zrinski, Jelačić, Radić; Arts: Meštrović, Gundulić, Bukovac; Sports: J. Kostelić, Ivanišević, Šuker; Extras:Stepinac, Šeper.--Thewanderer (talk) 17:05, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Science - Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog; Politics - King Tomislav, Jelačić, Tito, Tuđman; Arts - Meštrović, Gundulić, Andrić; Sports - Ivanišević, Vlašić, Janica; Extras - Nikola Šubić Zrinski, Ivan Mažuranić, Marko Marulić, Faust Vrančić, Alojzije Stepinac, Ante Starčević Kebeta (talk) 17:06, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Kebeta listed 4 persons under Politics. Three are allowed. So he should remove one from his preffered selection. --Ali Pasha (talk) 22:28, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Check the rules. A minimum of 3 is required in each area, which gives a minimum of 12 candidates. Another 8 can be added regardless of their area or era, as long as the total doesn't exceed 20. '' Timbouctou 22:25, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Science - Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog; Politics - King Tomislav, King Demetrius Zvonimir, Jelačić, Tito, Radić (Tuđman is far too recent); Arts - Meštrović, Gundulić, Andrić, Nazor, Krleža, Ujević; Sports - Ivanišević, Dražen Petrović, Janica Kostelić; Extras - Nikola Šubić Zrinski, Ivan Mažuranić, Marko Marulić -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 11:16, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Science: Bošković, Prelog, Ružička; Politics: Jelačić, Radić, Tito; Arts: Meštrović, Krleža, Tadijanović; Sports: D. Petrović, Parlov, Šuker; Extras: Strossmayer, Brlić-Mažuranić, Mohorovičić --Dr. Vicodine (talk) 16:42, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Science: Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog; Politics: Jelačić, Nikola Šubić Zrinski, King Tomislav; Arts: Gundulić, Bukovac, Ivana Brlić Mažuranić; Sports: Janica Kostelić, Blanka Vlašić, Dražen Petrović; Extras: Stepinac, Savka Dapčević-Kučar, Andrija Hebrang. --Ali Pasha (talk) 18:44, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You're gonna have to be more precise - is that Andrija Hebrang (father) or Andrija Hebrang (son)?'' Timbouctou 21:24, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The father. --Ali Pasha (talk) 22:28, 3 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Science: Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog; Politics: Jelačić, King Tomislav, Tuđman Arts: Gundulić, Bukovac, Ivana Brlić Mažuranić; Sports: Janica Kostelić, Blanka Vlašić, Dražen Petrović; Extras: Stepinac Vodomar (talk) 03:35, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * As far as I am concerned current choice is quite OK. SO, my option is that.--Kennechten (talk) 15:40, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * And I also oppose inserting Tito here. We are looking to insert famous for good stuffs not war crimes.Therefore Tito and Pavelić are 100% unacceptable.--Kennechten (talk) 18:30, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Your reasoning is in contradiction to policy, we are to maintain a neutral point of view. The montage cannot be a wall of praise alone. --Nuujinn (talk) 17:23, 4 November 2010 (UTC)::::Which policy????--Kennechten (talk) 15:22, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Kenechten, the current choice contains 25 people, which is 5 more than your maximum number of candidates. Since it is very likely that the final number will be less than 25, you should make a selection of up to 20 names for your vote to count. '' Timbouctou 22:42, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Science - Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog; Politics - Jelačić, Starčević, Radić,Tuđman; Arts -Ivana Brlić Mažuranić, Meštrović, Gundulić,Marko Marulić,Šenoa ;Sports - Ivanišević, Kostelić, Šuker; Extras -, Lisinski, Faust Vrančić Kennechten (talk) 14:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Science: Faust Vrancić, Mohorovičić, Prelog; Politics: Andrija Hebrang (father), King Tomislav, Tuđman Arts: Gundulić, Bukovac, Ivana Brlić Mažuranić; Sports: Janica Kostelić, Davor Suker, Dražen Petrović; Extras: Stepinac --Croq (talk) 07:27, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Science:Ruđer Bošković,Faust Vrančić,Politics: Demetrius Zvonimir,Nikola Šubić Zrinski,Josip Jelačić,Stjepan Radić, Ante Starčević; Arts: Ivan Gundulić, Vlaho Bukovac,Ivo Andrić, Tin Ujević,Juraj Julije Klović,Marko Marulić, Ivana Brlić-Mažuranić, Antun Vrančić, Alojzije Stepinac,Josip Juraj Strossmayer; Sports: Dražen Petrović, Blanka Vlašić,Ivano Balić --Čeha (razgovor) 13:45, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You named 20 candidates but only 2 of them come from science. I've included your vote in the tally, but you should replace one of the other 18 candidates with a scientist before the final decision is made. '' Timbouctou 22:40, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Science: Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog; Politics: Starčević, Jelačić, Broz, Radić Arts: Gundulić, Meštrović, Marulić, Andrić, Lisinski; Sports: Kostelić, Ivanišević, Petrović; Extras: Strossmayer--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:57, 9 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Science: Ruđer Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog; Politics: Andrija Hebrang (father), King Tomislav, Tuđman Arts: Gundulić, Marulić, Ivana Brlić Mažuranić; Sports: Kostelić, Suker, Ivanišević; Extras: Stepinac --A-ciha (talk) 00:56, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Science: Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog; Politics: Tito, Ivica Račan, Šubić Zrinski; Arts: Krleža, Lisinski, Mažuranić; Sports: Zoran Primorac, Balić, Ivanišević; Tty29a (talk) 15:48, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

3. Conclusion
The voting ended ended on Sunday, 14 November, and below are the final results. We still haven't decided about the number of images but I assume 16 would be a good number (as it is the closest to the average of numbers thrown around). Using the system I proposed in the Quantity section the final composition would include top three voted candidates in each area plus the three most-voted persons across the board. In case of unavailable freely-licensed images the next available candidate wins a spot. Below are the final voting results, with a symbol denoting a person with an image we could readily use and the  denoting a candidate whose image may have issues (I've removed all the candidates who received just a single vote or less). Persons in bold are the undisputed top 15 who should have precedence in the final selection.


 * The First 12 (top 3 from each area) would therefore include Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog, Jelačić, Radić, Tito, Gundulić, Meštrović, Bukovac, Kostelić, Ivanišević, Vlašić. For all of these we have images we can use for the infobox collage and there are no issues here.
 * The 13th with 8 votes would be Stepinac.
 * The 14th and 15th with 7 votes each would have to be Brlić-Mažuranić and Petrović. However, I'm unsure about Brlić's image and the picture of Petrović's statue as the former was uploaded under fair use criteria and the latter is potentially unsuitable for our purposes. If either one or both fail to make the final cut we will have to move down the ladder to fill in their spots.
 * The 16th spot is contested between four candidates who all got 6 votes - Šuker, Andrić, King Tomislav and Marulić. The first two have suitable images while the latter two have the same issue as Petrović.
 * Extras would be the 4 candidates who all received 5 votes who all have images we could immediately use (F. Vrančić, N.Š. Zrinski, Tuđman and Lisinski). Since the 23 people I've listed so far is enough to make a 16-member selection even if all of the candidates whose images are unavailable drop out I've removed from the list everyone who won four votes or less.


 * SUMMARY
 * The solid 13 out of the final 16 are Bošković, Mohorovičić, Prelog, Jelačić, Radić, Tito, Gundulić, Meštrović, Bukovac, Kostelić, Ivanišević, Vlašić and Stepinac.
 * The remaining three spots will be filled in with some of the following (in order of precedence, with problematic candidates listed in italics):
 * Brlić-Mažuranić, Petrović
 * Andrić / Šuker / King Tomislav / Marulić
 * F.Vrančić / N.Š. Zrinski / Tuđman / Lisinski

You are invited to comment on the final selection below this paragraph. Volunteers willing to compose the final collage and/or resolve some of the image issues are wanted. Rants about Tito are not :-) Keep it civil and constructive. Cheers. '' Timbouctou 15:06, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If a number of persons remains tied for the 16th spot even after image eligibility issues are analyzed, perhaps a 6x3 layout may be employed as a means of not dropping anyone with tied result - at least if total number of persons with 6+ votes turns out to be 18 - Englishmen use 7x3, so I think 6x3 would work too.--Tomobe03 (talk) 15:43, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I am OK with the final list, except the oldest person in top 12 is Ivan Gundulić from 16/17th century, Ruđer Bošković is from 18th century, and all the others are from 19 to 21th century. This gives a bad impression, as if the were none Croats in the past. This should be fixed, by adding to the top 12 the oldest ones from the Conclusion list. It can be added 4 persons which makes 16 persons total (4x4), or 8 which makes 20 (5x4). I respect the voting results, just pointing that Croats are here from 7th century, not from 18 or 19th century. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 08:30, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * 3 rows of four people seems perfect, I can't imagine why we'd need more. I would again strongly suggest using the top 12 in order for the portraits to remain visible, and to prevent overcrowding. The final list also seems pretty wrong. Voting is, in the end, not a very good method. 16 is just too much, and can we really place Kostelić or Vlašić or Ivanišević over King Tomislav or N.Š. Zrinski? I would use the top 12, while replacing (temporarily popular) sportspeople with Kings and Bans :P -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 14:41, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree that the final selection lacks Croats from earlier eras but the Croatian national identity as we know it today was largely formed in the 19th century during the Illyrian movement, so this kind of outcome is expected. Apart from princes and bans whose names we were taught at school, there are very few notable persons of the past that an average Croat (let alone reader of English Wikipedia) might be familiar with. The only one which IMO may deserve inclusion is King Tomislav. As for Direktor's comments - one editor's POV statements like "it seems pretty wrong" are not really a measure of anything. We had a poll open to everyone and it would be grossly uncivil and condescending to ignore votes of 14 other editors' because it may "seem wrong in the end" to you (btw if you disagreed with the method you could have said so during the three weeks the poll lasted). Also, may I remind you that the whole debate started because of the proposal to include more women, which was then followed by several editors' suggestions that the selection should be more diverse across different periods and walks of life since we had no sportspeople in the image (a rather odd situation knowing how hysterically proud of sporting achievements Croats tend to get). The suggestion to remove the two women selected (who are btw both sportspeople) would not only constitute total disregard to the consensus-building process we are so fond of promoting at Wikipedia but would also be completely against the purpose of the whole thing. As for the number of images used, it seems that this is still under debate. I've asked for other people's opinion on this on several occasions but to no avail so I simply took the median of all numbers thrown around (which is 16). I personally do not think it would be too much (the Serbs, the French, the Basques, the Germans and Italians all have 20+ images in the infobox picture) and you yourself had suggested "either 12 or 15" during the discussion. And btw, no, I do not think that one of the greatest women skiers in history or the best women athlete in the world can be labeled as "temporarily popular". As for Tomobe's suggestion - expanding to 18 people would be fine with me as long as other editors agree. '' Timbouctou 02:37, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry everyone, we're not the English. Disagree with expanding. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 21:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

4. Comments
I am adding this subsection so that 'Voting area' want be scrambled by the new comments, like this one: Timbouctou, I fully support your concept of voting, which will end this discussion. But I was wondering why have you put only 15 names? Maybe 16 names + 4 extra (in case of 20 images) would be better? Regards, Kebeta (talk) 12:45, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Each voter should submit a minimum of 12 people (three each from Arts, Science, Politics and Sports). Any additional names are allowed, as long as the total number does not exceed 20 (as it is unlikely that we will have more than 20 people in the image). This is because many of us here are into just one of these areas (some will want to nominate 7 artists while others will argue for 6 politicians). Therefore this rule will force people to pick the three or four names absolutely essential to each area, plus the fifth group which is open to everyone and anyone. This means that along with 3 candidates from each area, every editor can put up to 8 additional names in the fifth group. It doesn't really matter how you group your votes as long as the 12 mandatory ones are in there.


 * Once the voting is over, we will make a ranked list for each of the four areas. Depending on the total number of people (which we will decide about as we go along) the top 3 or 4 people from each group will qualify for the image, while all others who have failed to finish in the top 3 or 4 but have received votes will go into the fifth column. Then we will check the availability of images for our top choices and remove the ones which are unavailable. All the remaining spots will then be filled with people left over from the fifth column, in order of votes and image availability. It is entirely up to you to decide whether you will put down 12 or 20 names. This may seem complicated at first but once everyone gets the rules it should be as painless as possible. The point is to pick 12 or 16 people who are by consensus the best balanced group of people Croats can offer, and we'll worry about additional spots once we arrive to this core group. '' Timbouctou 14:44, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

As per Zvonimir, he is a ruler that died in 1089 and there is no exact, historically accurate portrait of him... which is why I would exclude him. --Clockwork Orange (talk) 12:50, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I disagree with your reasoning, because using that logic the English would have to avoid listing Shakespeare and the Greeks would have to drop people from ancient Greece. On the other hand, I doubt that Zvonimir will make the top 3 politicians of all time by anyone's choice so it shouldn't be an issue. ''<span style='font-family: Georgia, serif; color:#639;'> Timbouctou 14:44, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

And Juan Vucetich is also one of the most famous Croats, he invented fingerprints, or how you call it... :/ So I voted for him also.--Wustefuchs (talk) 15:02, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

- this is my list of Croats. Now, with the new vote, we can change it. But please do notice I added Ivan Vučetić, chap born in Hvar, and lived in Argentina, invented fingerprints, and also others, like Julije Klović, a famous Croatian painter from 15th century.--Wustefuchs (talk) 15:06, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Vuchetich? Is he even recognizable on a photograph? I alto think people should be able to recognize the people on the photographs... --Clockwork Orange (talk) 15:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

It is private problem if someone isn't recognized on the image, for that we got discription of image, like now. But Vučetić is very famous, also his invention is very importaint. For his picture, see the article.--Wustefuchs (talk) 15:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Also, ther is a youn scientist who got famous for his invention - wirelles transfer of energy, a dream of Nikola Tesla. He is Marin Soljačić.--Wustefuchs (talk) 15:14, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * We don't have to put everyone... that is why we are making a selection... we don't have to put every Croat considered important by you (if so, we should put Gjalski, Vidrić, Kumičić, Ante Kovačić and another 100 of extremely important people)... please, make a selection --Clockwork Orange (talk) 15:32, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I've added Soljačić to the list of nominations. ''<span style='font-family: Georgia, serif; color:#639;'> Timbouctou 16:40, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Although I haven't been participating in the discussion, I've added my vote to (hopefully) help build concensus. Also, if there is a desire to put a religious figure in the picture, I've suggested either Stepinac (soon-to-be-saint), or cardinal Šeper (highest-level Croat in church history as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith). Cheers.--Thewanderer (talk) 17:05, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Number of chaps on the image

I think that 25 persons is good number. 5x5.--Wustefuchs (talk) 19:06, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Twenty should be better... 25 is just too much, people won't be able to recognize all of them nor see them clearly... 20 max --Clockwork Orange (talk) 19:14, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

So where are Toni Kukoc,Dino Radja and Goran Ivanisevic?Somebody put Ancic and Cilic?Haha..what did they accomplish in their career?And also where is Miroslav Krleza?--Scrosby85 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:17, 22 October 2010 (UTC).

Marko Marulic is off that list?--Scrosby85 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:24, 22 October 2010 (UTC).


 * Wusterfuchs' image is ideologically biased, and very likely faar too populated. One would be hard pressed to find any one historical personality there who disagrees with the user's own political views. This applies even to sportsmen, can anyone see Dražen Petrović there, likely the most famous Croatian athlete, or Krleža, our one truly internationally acclaimed author? I also cannot believe we have excluded Ivanišević etc.
 * Folks, lets get real: we as Croats do not really have that many internationally famous historical persons. We are not Germans. If a single person outside Croatia ever heard of Soljačić, I'll eat my stethoscope. Ančić? Ćilić? Where is Krleža (our most internationally acclaimed author), where is Nazor?


 * What this discussion suffers from is a lack of established criteria for inclusion. These, imho, should be:
 * At least some inkling or hope of international notability (except perhaps for the medieval Croatian kings, who should probably be included regardless of notability) in the English speaking world - this is enWiki guys.
 * Fame and notability of that person should be proven to have stood the test of time. I.e. we should be listing historical persons - not recent celebrities. At best we can stretch this to include Kostelić and Ivanišević, because they're sportsmen (but certainly not Ančić and the like). However political personalities should not be more recent than the customary historiographic 20 years, which are usually required for objectivity (this criteria would exclude Franjo Tuđman, for example).
 * The person should not be viewed as a non-Croat in international English-language publications. E.g. despite my best efforts, I was unable to prove that such was the case for Fausto Veranzio (Faust Vrančić).
 * At best 12 or 15 people, else we risk the lead being populated with a mass of irrelevant unknown people, degrading the whole image and drowning the really BIG folks like Krleža, Radić, and Petrović. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 11:03, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't get it...Now on the pictures there are Balic,Kostelic,Ancic and Cilic but their names are not under the pictures?correct that or remove Ancic and Cilic..Thanks--Scrosby85 (talk) 17:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


 * ubacite tita! --178.223.153.113 (talk) 15:24, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ubaci ga ti na stranicu o Srbima ako ti je toliko drag!78.1.124.164 (talk) 09:17, 27 October 2010 (UTC)


 * No on Tito. If english do not have Churchil why should we have Tito? Besides it is best to include some historical (not from recent history) personalities, artists and famous people. Dictators are in general not welcomed on most famous person pages (no matter how much somebody think they were benevolent). Čeha (razgovor) 07:32, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No to Tito. Yes he was a historical figure, his achievements are dubious and it is not appropriate and a a matter of fact it is insulting. Also placing sports people of recent fame really do not show any of the achievements that Croatians have given to the world. Vodomar (talk) 08:50, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Janica Kostelić definitely should have been included. Her fame is recent,that is right, but her contribution have been extraordinary.Others are doubtful...--78.1.124.164 (talk) 09:20, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

No to Tito. Same reasons why in "Germans" is no picture of Hitler, "Rusians" or "Georgians" is no picture of Stalin ...etc. --Croq (talk) 09:27, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Isn't it interesting how so many users have so little to say bar the incessant babble about Tito? If you want your voice to be heard than vote in the poll above. We've been through all the Tito this and Tito that BS many times before and that's exactly why we've put the issue on vote in the first place. ''<span style='font-family: Georgia, serif; color:#639;'> Timbouctou 12:44, 27 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Timbouctou, do not demean others comments. -- Ali Pasha (talk) 18:57, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Strong oppose to the idea of Tito in this "combination". This is pure WP:OR. We as Wikipedians shouldn't decide on such matters. The image is completely unnecessary and unencyclopaedical. We should leave it up to broader view, and not decide without the consent of the hr:wiki Community. Wüstefuchs should have started this "debate" there, and would receive an adequate answer. No to Tito. This kind of practice at en:wiki is harmful towards the very idea of wiki, whereby Wikimedia's projects collaborate. As for the number, two rows of four pictures (2×4) would suffice. -- Ali Pasha (talk) 18:57, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If we agree that the article needs an image, then the selection of people in there is purely our choice as there is virtually no objective method of arriving to a suitable and reliable list of greatest Croats, Scots or Eskimos which could be cited. In fact, the only semi-reliable poll ever done on the subject was Nacional's 2004 Greatest Croat list which - surprise, surprise - put Tito right on top. Therefore this poll very much is the idea of wiki as Wikipedia articles more often then not try to present a consensus in cases when there are different equally reliable and citeable viewpoints. As for the idea that "wikimedia projects should collaborate", I'd like to see wiki.hr editors consulting their wiki.sr colleagues (or vice versa) on topics about recent history, and I would be almost ecstatic if you would care to spread the cross-wiki evangelism over there. As stated above on at least three occasions (something you would have seen have you bothered to go through the discussion instead of taking a few minutes of your very precious time to join the no-Tito parade), the very purpose of this article having an infobox is to depict Croatian people that people in the anglophone world and globally may be familiar with. As far as I know (and feel free to correct my 30+ years of experience of living in the country that as of October 2010 most Croats call home), Tito still has a pretty big square in Zagreb named after him, he has fan clubs around the country, he tops the polls whenever polls of this type are conducted, there are monuments to him still standing in places in Croatia and his face adorns products from t-shirts to lighters - which are all legally and freely sold from Slovenia to Macedonia (something one can hardly say about any of the tyrants that some Croats like to compare him to). In addition, since most Tito-bashers here are unbelievably inept at talking about anyone other than Tito and seem to have no opinion on anything apart from taking the keyboard to express urbi et orbi their dissatisfacton with the idea that Tito might apper in there, I find it difficult to take their opinion seriously. It is really pathetic that a nation of 4.5 million+ is as schizophrenic as this and the very fact that opinions which most of us know wouldn't be worth jack shit if you shouted them from the rooftops at Jelačić Square are even tolerated here is the very proof that we are sticking with wiki principles as we try to accomodate even the most ludicrous preferences using a bloody poll. The funny thing is that even if we took your idea of cross-wiki consulting to the extreme and consulted everyone from Egyptians to Montenegrins including Eritreans and Americans, chances are Tito would come up on top again and again, at least judging by the awards and decorations of Josip Broz Tito. Now run along and ask all your friends to vote because hey - you don't want Tito in there, do you? ''<span style='font-family: Georgia, serif; color:#639;'> Timbouctou 21:14, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

If you knew political orientation Nacional (and its readers) you would find it to be strange. Tito is not famous but  in famous and as such is not acceptable.His role in Croatian history is more than enough controversial to be included here--78.1.116.102 (talk) 06:26, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Slavko Goldstein and Anton Tus are a couple of people who tend to disagree, as well as the current and former presidents of Croatia, and even their predecessor was caught on film saying that "Tito was without a doubt one of the greatest European statesmen of World War II". Either way, celebrating Tito like they do at Kumrovec every year is not illegal in Croatia or anywhere else in the world for that matter and as such he can and will be offered as an option in our little poll. Yes, Roosevelt authorized the internment of Japanese Americans, Truman dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Churchill bombed German cities and is considered by some to be a mass murderer, but you don't see the British or the Americans babbling on about how infamous they are. I guess "discussions" like this is what you get after 2 decades of TV Kalendar. ''<span style='font-family: Georgia, serif; color:#639;'> Timbouctou 08:04, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, English do not have Churchill in their pages, so your comparation is highly flawled. We should put;

Ruđer Bošković,Faust Vrančić, Demetrius Zvonimir,Nikola Šubić Zrinski,Josip Jelačić,Stjepan Radić, Ante Starčević, Ivan Gundulić, Vlaho Bukovac,Ivo Andrić, Tin Ujević,Juraj Julije Klović,Ivan Mažuranić, Ivana Brlić-Mažuranić,Antun Vrančić Alojzije Stepinac,Josip Juraj Strossmayer, Dražen Petrović, Blanka Vlašić,Ivano Balić 20 persons: 1 medieval king, 1 medieval hero, 3 heroes of new age (father of the nation amongs them), 8 artists, 2 scientists, 2 bishops (of which one is a candidate for a saint and another is and icon and patron of renovation period), and 3 sport masters :) Strongly opose Tito, no nation on any wikipedia does not have anybody who is so contorversial, and thank good we have a lot of famous persons who could represent as. If english do not have Churchill should we put our dictator instead of some artist, scientist or sport master?Čeha (razgovor) 08:28, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * My comparison is not flawed as I wasn't commenting on whether the English have Churchill but whether those people are considered controversial or not. Whether someone is controversial is determined by popular opinion and popular opinion only as the very definition of "controversial" is "something people can't agree on" and so far 5 out of 9 wikipedians voted for Tito. It doesn't seem too controversial to me. ''<span style='font-family: Georgia, serif; color:#639;'> Timbouctou 08:43, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Isn't there a rule for no living people, therefore some of those mentioned would be ineligible. Also, I'm pretty sure Ivo Andric is a Serb, he's gone out and stated it in the past. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukic12345 (talk • contribs) 05:25, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * AFAIK no, there is no such rule. The Germans have Angela Merkel, the Basque have Mikel Arteta and the French have Brigitte Bardot and Zinedine Zidane, to name a few. As for Ivo Andrić, the article about him includes a referenced claim that he was born into a Bosnian Croat family, and the reference provided is an article on Croatian literature published by Yale. Unless you can provide an equally credible reference which clams otherwise, he will thus be considered a Croat for our purposes (but should you produce one I'll be happy to remove him from the list of candidates as everyone we finally put in the infobox picture of ethnic Croats should uncontroversially be a Croat). On the other hand, if there is no doubt about his ethnicity it would be really odd NOT to include a Nobel Prize winner, but I guess we'll have to leave it to the popular vote, however arbitrary it may be. ''<span style='font-family: Georgia, serif; color:#639;'> Timbouctou 13:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Timbouctou I'm certain that you did not think through when you made your comparision and that's the result of it. We've got more great persons than just one post ww2 dictator. Your comparison about transwiki cooperation is also flawed. Comparison can be made about sources, and not about politics. You are puting politics and POV here in the first place against clear opinion of majority (which was showed by the votes) and against examples from similar articles. Basicly when vote is finished I think that we can close this issue. Čeha (razgovor) 08:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Some of the commentators seem to be showing particularly personal feelings about Tito. WHether one thinks he was god or bad for Croatia and Croats, he certainly is a notable Croat Hxseek (talk) 09:27, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * When is the voting over? What is the deadline? As per quantity, ether 12 or 15, meaning 4x3 or 5x3 (meaning that the people should be sorted according to the categories mentioned above, in the voting area). People who argue contra Tito go mainly according with their own political views, disregarding accurate historical facts, statements by political figures and historians (who have proven themselves in time, referring mainly to Slavko Goldstein, our, probably, best and most accurate historian), which would actually mean that they do not have valid arguments for their thesis. Also, Nikola Šubić Zrinski wasn't a medieval hero (The battle of Szeget was in 1566... which was after Columbo's discovery of America in 1492, am I right?) --Clockwork Orange (talk) 10:54, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've set the deadline for Sunday, 14 November, so hopefully this will be over in five days. Cheers. ''<span style='font-family: Georgia, serif; color:#639;'> Timbouctou 23:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * About Golstein as "probably, best and most accurate historian" no comment. That what is beeing pushed by some magazines and daily press. Not by other historians.
 * there are 5 voters explicitely against Tito and they are also valid. People who vote for him as yugonostalgic communist such as DIREKTOR and you.
 * Nikola Šubić Zrinski might not be medieval but he is hero -definitely--78.2.159.114 (talk) 12:01, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

No, that has been pushed by all, including the historian community... and not just our, Croatian, but also international. Yes, and there are 5 explicitly for Tito, not because we're communists or something similar, but because we consider the fact that he was an important and relevant historical figure, more relevant than some of the mentioned. Regarding Zrinski, I haven't said that he wasn't a hero, I have just disputed your knowledge of history... --Clockwork Orange (talk) 21:30, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Nationalist nonsense, of the textbook standard form I might add. Politics should certainly not find their way on Wikipedia articles. If the person is notable enough (and Tito is among the most notable) then he/she should be included. Not much more to discuss. Take your politics somewhere else.


 * Users be advised there is currently a WP:CANVASSING campaign taking place on the Croatian Wikipedia and elsewhere with the express aim of political POV-pushing on this Wiki. The IPs have very likely been canvassed here. In no case should these persons be allowed to influence encyclopedia contents by their your political views and preferences. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 13:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

and you and your buddies are just here by accident??? You have proposed Tito also strictly following NPOV rules?? The one and only reason you have proposed Tito is that you are fan of his. Yes, he is notable. Ante Pavelić is notable as well but I doubt you˛& co would propose him.

You promote your political agenda while preaching to other to "stay away from politics". what a hypocrite!

Inclusion of Tito in this article is totally inappropriate because he was "Croat" as much as Michael Jackson was African American--Kennechten (talk) 18:26, 2 November 2010 (UTC)


 * As I said, brought here by political CANVASSING - by their own admission, too. Comments of the above IP/user should be ignored entirely. I am not interested in which party ideology you are promoting here, but please find another place to do so. I imagine most people here are not partial to listening to political propaganda.


 * The idea that Tito is equivalent with Hitler, Pavelić, etc. can only be laughed at - not only by myself, but apparently by the majority of Croats as indicated by an actual professional study and poll conducted among thousands of our compatriots... -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 12:38, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

You can like or dislike it but for the rest of the (non-communist) world Tito was a (communist) dictator. And such personalities are not acceptable.He can be listed amoung the persons like Nicolae Ceauşescu & other company.

let me see some works about Tito. Search "Tito dictator" in google books.

Tito was a dictator. he is Tito,dictator of Yugoslavia
 * Tito: Yugoslavia's great dictator : a reassessment
 * Thugs: How History's Most Notorious Despots Transformed the World Through Includes the chapter "Josip Broz Tito-from partisan to dictator"
 * Tito, Mihailović, and the allies, 1941-1945
 * A visit to Tito:Dictator rests ,plays and plots in privacy
 * Life:Tito Defies Kremlin
 * Keeping Tito afloat
 * Why dictators?: The causes and forms of tyrannical rule since 600 B.C. including section about Tito

Also
 * hyperhistory:Dictators Hussein and Tito
 * Database about dictators
 * Communist dictator Josef Broz Tito ..
 * The Birth Of A Dictator: Josip Broz (Tito)

To conclude:in all serious books he is described as dictator.--Kennechten (talk) 15:30, 6 November 2010 (UTC)


 * "...except those I did not list"? xD
 * Nonsense. This issue was discussed at length on the Josip Broz Tito article. The sources overwhelmingly do not use the term "dictator" to describe him in the function of president of Yugoslavia. (If I recall it was found in something like 25% of publications or less.)


 * To coclude:the fact that you went to Google Books, googled "Tito dictator" and cherry-picked half-a-dozen books which do use the term is not about to impress anybody... :) -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 15:41, 6 November 2010 (UTC)


 * your googled list "Tito Croat" will not impress anybody either. Tito's Yugoslavia has been single party state, with no democracy where political disidents have been murdered by secret police. That country has probabbly been better place to live than i. e. North Korea, Cuba or Communist Albania but it still was a dictatorship. you can of course use euphemisms like People's republic or state of the masses The only reason for inserting Tito here is you titoism and you fool nobody with this propaganda.--Kennechten (talk) 12:42, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * My list represents the sources that state Tito was a Croat. You are free to google "Tito Slovene" if you like, but do not think that cherry-picking a few of the sources closes the issue you brought up.


 * Apart from Google testing, you have also demonstrated that you have no idea what Titoism is, and that you think America is a dictatorship (the CIA holds the record for all political assassinations, Guantanamo is not particularly "better" than Goli). Now that you mention it, judging by the relative GDP per capita the SFRY (before the crysis of the late '80s) seems also to have been a "better place to live" than Russia, Hungary, Poland, East Germany, Romania, Czechoslovakia(!), Portugal, Ireland, etc. - and yes, every single of its modern successor states (except Slovenia). :)


 * Also, I would like to caution users on this page that any further comments on users' political views will be reported immediately. I've had enough of that particular nonsense. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 23:17, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to look at WP:POT--Kennechten (talk) 13:28, 19 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah yeah, just be sure to lay off my political views... -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 14:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Resolution
So, people, we had our vote? Is someone going to make the compilation or do we have to wait for something big to happen? :-S --Clockwork Orange (talk) 22:32, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll get on it tommorow. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 01:45, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * OK --Clockwork Orange (talk) 13:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Whoops, my bad - won't be able to. Apologies :P -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 18:20, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

How come? --93.142.143.191 (talk) 11:37, 28 December 2010 (UTC)