Talk:Dabiša of Bosnia

Vandalism
Can anyone provide a reason to keep the Bosniak history category? --HolyRomanEmperor 18:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

If you want I can repeat this as long as you ask this question. Are you pretending to be a dumb or what, because I answered to this question for n-th times? Bosniak history is history related to Bosnia, and Stjepan was a Bosnian ruler. Bosniaks base their identity on Bosnia. --Emir Arven 20:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Let me remind you about your forgery again:


 * Serb sources are mostly based on mythology and nationalism. That is just a pure fact. Wikipedia is not a place for collecting fairy tales. I have seen that you represent yourself as a historian. I dont believe you. Maybe you are a historian, but a bad one. Because historian should know the difference between facts and anachronism or between facts and stories or facts and nationalism. You go from article to article and put the term "Serb" where it should be and where it shouldnt be. You talked about Stjepan's chart, but just about the last sentece, added by some scribe. Why? Because you wanted to show or tried to connect Serb language with a script called by that scribe "Serb script" (That kind of script didnt even exist). The source that you presented is Serb nationalistic site, that support war criminals. It says that Draza Mihajlovic, was a WWII hero. Draža Mihailović was sentenced as a war criminal and was executed in former Yugoslavia for crimes that he commited in eastern Bosnia. He was nazi supporter and collaborator. This site also supports Slobodan Milosevic, accuesed for genocide. This site was even quoted by Slobodan Milosevic during the trial. This is not serious source. Also you are the one that put V. Corovic book as a source, and told us that that book supported your theses. When I checked it I found that you lied. Can you tell me why, my dear friend? So tell me how possible could I believe you anymore? This is just a good sign that many Serbs deny Bosniak identity as Serb war criminal Ratko Mladic did when he commited genocide.--Emir Arven 20:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Full explaination given here: Talk:Stephen I of Bosnia. Also, see User_talk:HolyRomanEmperor/Archive5 - it's relevant to the subject.

Also, you reminded me to add the Serbian history category - as he was a Serbian King. --HolyRomanEmperor 20:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Date of death
Did he die on 6 September 1395 or 8 September 1395? the wiki shows both dates... also it's mentioned on the Jelena Gruba wiki that he ruled until 8 September 1395. Which date is correct?--DemirBajraktarevic (talk) 06:25, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I've also seen some authors claim that he died on 7 September. Go figure. Surtsicna (talk) 23:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Name
According to Google Books, "Stephen Dabiša" is nonexistent. "Stjepan Dabiša" has 108 hits, "kralj Dabiša" has 62, "Stefan Dabiša" has 22. In Cyrillic, the hits are "Стефан Дабиша" (66), "краљ Дабиша" (37), "Стеван Дабиша" (19), "Стјепан Дабиша" (10).--Z oupan 10:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree that this Stephen name is rather strange to a south slavic catholic kingdom. Why Stjepan Dabisa get so many hits is beacuse he was catholic so it would be more logical that he would use the name in catholic term namely Stjepan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarmet (talk • contribs) 11:11, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Image
I have not found any old (PD) illustrations of Dabiša. Dabiša has been illustrated by Enver Imamović, who has done a family tree of the Kotromanić dynasty (Porodično stablo dinastije Kotromanića, autor dr Envera Imamovića); the illustration of him is found here.--Z oupan 10:11, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Jugoslovenski istorijski časopis, Volumes 33-34
Can anyone explain to me how this is a valid source? This is not in a neutral point of view and according to the rules of wikipedia this source is breaking the rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarmet (talk • contribs) 11:18, 18 September 2015 (UTC)