Talk:Disappearance of Ana Walshe

Ideological, political context of Walshe birth place
I really don't understand why some Wiki editors insist that Walshe was born in "Socialist Federal Republic Yugoslavia" (or just "former" Yugoslavia)?! When people ask me about the country of my origin i say: former Yugoslavia. Melania Trump was born in Slovenia, former Yugoslavia, but you will not see in her bio that she was born in: "Socialist Federal Republic  Yugoslavia", "Socialist Republic Slovenia". Not to mention people who were born in other Communist countries i.e. SSSR, German Democratic Republic, etc. It's really beyond comprehension. Linearvector (talk) 18:06, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Regarding the usage of "SFR Yugoslavia" here, please see MOS:GEO and the paragraph that begins with "Avoid anachronism." There's nothing ideological here. We say that George Washington was born in British America, that Mahatma Gandhi was born in British India, and that Yitzhak Rabin was born in Mandatory Palestine—not because we deny American or Indian or Israeli sovereignty over the land these people were born on, but because those were, factually, the political entities they were born in. To say that she was born in "former Yugoslavia" would be confusing, as the most logical reading of that would be "land that was no longer called Yugoslavia by the time of her birth", which is not true. (CC Alalch E.) --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 18:14, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Post–edit conlict note: Trump's article currently says she was born in "SR Slovenia, SFR Yugoslavia", consistent with our rule on anachronism. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 18:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * "Former Yugoslavia" is a colloquialism: too informal and not precise enough for an encyclopedia (someone born in 1995 in Slovenia could also be said to have been born in former Yugoslavia [pretty common usage]: they were born in what had been Yugoslavia). It's also a presentism: adding "former" to Yugoslavia only makes sense in this era of history when the breakup of Yugoslavia is still relatively recent, and only has value for people who could be confused about Yugoslavia still existing or not. But an encyclopedia is written for an abstract reader from any period of history and from any subset of the world's population. Imagine someone a couple hundred years from now: "former Yugoslavia" will make as much sense to them as "former Holy Roman Empire". We don't say that Hammurabi was born in "former Babylonia". We don't say that Adolf Hitler was born in "former Austria-Hungary". In addition, as there have been multiple Yugoslavias (Kingdom of [SHS and the first actually so named Yugoslavia], the socialist Yugoslav state [two differently named iterations], and the post-breakup rump Yugoslavia [Serbia and Montenegro]) "former Yugoslavia" objectively means several things. That's why, as with any historical state, it's important to be precise. —Alalch E. 17:01, 2 March 2023 (UTC)