Talk:Jabuka, Pančevo

concentrationcamp
Can I call the concentrationcamp in Knicanin/ Rudolfsgnad a concentrationcamp or is it a taboo like here in germany and I am about to get in some major hassles here again?? If its not called concentrationcamp (had no oven) what is its political correct name in english speaking countrys...say the USnA?

I wouldnt call it Internment Camp cause Internment camps where more like holiday camps.

Korrigator 17:26, 17 Nov 2006 (CET) Prison camp sounds OK, i think some native english speaker that knows the camp should make a suggestion

Korrigator 18:01, 17 Nov 2006 (CET)

The words concentration camp are more fitting.....

German army
"army left long time ago"

Of those 340,000 Germans that lived in Vojvodina before the war, most of them (200,000) left from region together with German army and others were sent to prison camps. Why this village would be different case? PANONIAN  (talk)  18:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

different major from the army. different way back Korrigator 16:55, 19 Nov 2006 (CET)

Germans
The article says that most Germans left with the German retreat. However, according to the figures, most of the ethnic German citizens were sent by the Partisans to a prison camp... It's self-contradicting. --PaxEquilibrium 20:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * No, it is not self-contradicting because according to the article 2,109 Germans were sent to prison camps, while according to this web site population of the village in that time numbered 6,807 people, mostly Germans: http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?p=jabuka+srbi&prssweb=Search&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&x=wrt&u=www.jabuka.org.yu/jabuka_s.htm&w=jabuka+srbi&d=RIQHw5IFNpWI&icp=1&.intl=us PANONIAN   (talk)  20:42, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

2936 ethnic germans. You need the exact names or you wanna count the number from the church books? Korrigator 16:58 19 Nov 2006 (CET)


 * 2936 ethnic germans what? Is that a number of Germans that lived in the village according to your source? Then why link that I provided claim that after the war population of village numbered 6,807 people? I assume that most of those 6,807 were Germans, so what your number of 2936 refering to? PANONIAN   (talk)  14:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

According to census 1944 there were 2603 people living in Jabuka. Among those there were 2323 Germans and 260 Romanians and 16 Croats.--Speidelj (talk) 21:22, 15 February 2009 (UTC)


 * There was no census in 1944. 81.18.51.2 (talk) 13:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Have a look at: Heimatortausschuss Jabuka,Heimatbuch der Ortsgemeinde Jabuka, Census 1944. You do not offer any discussion-page. Why don+t you out yourself?--Speidelj (talk) 23:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * There was no census in 1944 (only in 1941 and 1948) - you probably have here some unofficial estimation. And you have discussion page in every article, so it is place where you should come before posting anti-serb german propaganda and before removing facts about fascist crimes against serbs and jews during the war. there was furnace for burning here, you know, even if you want to hide this fact. 212.69.0.46 (talk) 09:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean with anti-serb german propaganda?--Speidelj (talk) 22:54, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I mean the removal of data about Serbs killed by German troops and posting into every village article web link about Germans that is not related to the village itself. 212.69.4.119 (talk) 10:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

There was a census in 1944 organized by the Headquarter of Zrenjanin.--Speidelj (talk) 14:27, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, but that was not official census like the one in 1948. 81.18.62.135 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC).

People were counted, that counts.--Speidelj (talk) 21:38, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Ridiculous numbers?!!
"26 of them where shot on the 26 october 1944 in Pančevo, and 15 more where shot on the 15 November 1944 in Pančevo"

26 people killed on October 26, and 15 people killed on 15 November. I am not drunk to see double numbers, so what is wrong here? PANONIAN  (talk)  04:34, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

You are right. The 26 where shot on october the 16th. Korrigator 17:02 19 nov 2006 (CET)

Jabuka-Apfeldorf
The so-called German name „Apfeldorf“ was never used officially. It was forced by a German officer, which lasted just for two years during Worldwar II. The German name for Jabuka is Jabuka. For more details see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jabuka_%28Banat%29 --Speidelj (talk) 21:56, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Coordinates of Jabuka
The coordinates are
 * lat_deg = 44 | lat_min = 56 | lat_sec = 58
 * lon_deg = 20 | lon_min = 35 | lon_sec = 59

but unfortunately I am not able to fill them into the article. Maybe someone can help.--Speidelj (talk) 19:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Done. -- Local  hero  20:20, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Stratište
Where is Stratište? I put it into google and looked it up in dictionaries.

Selo Jabuka nalazi se na oko 44,9 stepeni severne geografske širine i na oko 20,6 stepeni istocne geografske dužine, a na nadmorskoj visini 69-72 metara. U selu postoje sledeci mikrotopomini: Ada srce, Aerodrom, Bašte, Galikov salaš, Gornje bašte, Gornje deteline, Zadružna detelina, Zahumske, Jabucka ada, Jabucka greda, Jabucka šuma, Kod bunara, Kod kanala, Livade, Magacin, Malauš, Mali vinograd, Mali rit, Mišin vinograd, Nadel (reka), Novo polje, Pet lanaca, Peto polje, Pecara, Rit, Srce, Tamiš (reka), Tri humke, Utrina, Ciglana, Crepajski vinogradi, Culj bunar i Šuma.--Speidelj (talk) 22:40, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * See: http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:QTsuWN5dP94J:www.pancevac.eu/index.php%3Fmodule%3Darticle%26issue_id%3D102%26id%3D19231%26comment%3Dtrue+jabuka+stratiste&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=20 "U saobraćajnoj nesreći koja se dogodila ovih dana kod spomenika „Stratište”, na putu Pančevo–Jabuka" (translation: in traffic accident that happened these days near Stratište monument at the Pančevo-Jabuka road) - so, it would be near this road. 81.18.58.162 (talk) 23:33, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * And see this too: http://urbanozeleno.blogspot.com/2007/08/streljanje-rodoljuba-stratite-2km-pre.html "Streljanje rodoljuba, Stratište (2km pre sela Jabuka, iz pravca Pančeva)" - so, it is 2 km away from Jabuka in the direction of Pančevo. 81.18.58.162 (talk) 00:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

The photo „Streljanje rodoljuba, Stratište Sept.1942, (2km pre sela Jabuka, iz pravca Pančeva)” was definitely not taken in Jabuka(Banat).I showed it to the president of the Jabuka community in Germany and to the 1. Secretary of that organization. What is called Stratište today, is known as “Kleines Ried” or „mali rid“. The execution there took place in September 1941.--Speidelj (talk) 14:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia trust to sources and photo description on that web page is an source, so if source claim that it is Jabuka near Pančevo in Banat, then we have more reason to believe to that source than to YOU (or your "friends"), it is how things works. If you find another source that will support your claim then we can speak about it (but real source, not your opinion or opinion of your friends or friends of your friends)... 81.18.62.135 (talk) 19:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

“As soon as the Saurer gas van completed its deadly mission and returned to Berlin, Serbia was declared Judenrein. Serbia was in fact only the second Nazi-occupied territory in Europe (Estonia being the first) to be formally declared 'cleaned of Jews' and the first outside Soviet lands to witness systematic mass murder of the Jews. On 29th May 1942, German Foreign office representative in Serbia Franz Rademacher proudly declared that 'the Jewish question is no longer an issue in Serbia” See:  So you should remove your  source. If Serbia was “judenrein” on Mai 1942, they could not have been killed on 1.Sep. 1942. And don´t dare again call me a denier of Holocaust, just because I don´t trust in your sources.--Speidelj (talk) 17:00, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I have glanced over the pages of “Jevrejski logor na Beogradskom Sajmištu “, but I could not find any reference to Stratište--Speidelj (talk) 17:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

From information that was obtained personally from individuals that lived in Jabuka during the afformentioned time..... Stratise is the place where the monument now is. This is also the same location where German troops killed Jews and Roma people..... and the place where the Partisans killed German citizens of Jabuka.

A Romanian from Jabuka
What user 212.69.4.119 (talk) is trying to create about Jabuka is rubbish. I am from Jabuka and so are my parents and my grandparents. I left Jabuka during the NATO-bombardment but I remember the situation in Jabuka very well. Problems started in 1918, when Jabuka became part of Jugoslavija. First the Serbs closed our Romanian school. Then in 1944 some of our People had to give up their houses in change for others because the partisans built a camp for German settlers. And speidelj is right when he sais, there was no Serbian settlement between the two world wars and in 1945 after world war II. I know it better than Curcic, cause I lived there. About strdiste (I did´t know the name but it must be the place near the monument). There were shootings two times. There was one day, when we were not allowed to leave our village when the German Army closed the road to Pancevo. That was one day. But the number of victims, the user has listed, seems incredibly high.There were rumours of four or five cars. And there was another shooting in fall 1944, wenn the Partizans killed some German people from the village.--Balcescu (talk) 21:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You are probably just sockpuppet made by user Speidelj, so I do not see reason to trust to any part of your "hearthbreaking story". How you know that there was no Serb colonists between 2 wars - are you 100 years old so you saw this with your own eyes? - I do not think so, so, please try to speak about things that you saw in your life (which might be last 15 years as I presume). 81.18.58.162 (talk) 23:39, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

What are you writing about? About Jabuka? “Inhabitants of the village that were not of German ethnicity were sent to forced labor.” That is just not true. We were inhabitants of the village but not of German ethnicity. And No one of us was sent to forced labor. And again, there were no Serbs settled between the two wars. But as I see, You are not interested in the truth, just spreading propaganda. That does´not help. And you coward, refusing to create an account, you call me a kid or a sockpuppet. Stay away from Wikipedia.--Balcescu (talk) 12:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I do not have reason to talk with sockpuppets - please prove your claims if you can (I already proved mine) - you can open link that I presented to you where you can read that there were Serb colonists between world wars, while you did not presented any source that claim opposite, end of story. 81.18.62.135 (talk) 19:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Do not call me sockpuppet. You are the one who is hiding behind IP-hoppers.Look at the population in 1921: no Serbs, 1944: 4 Serbs, 1946: 28 Serbs. Where is the Serbian settlement compared to the Germans and to the Romanians?--Balcescu (talk) 11:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Aha, and from where these 28 Serbs recorded in 1946 came according to you? (your sockpuppetmaster actually claimed that there was no Serbs at all in the village in this time). As for data in 1921 and 1944, 1921 data is obviously recorded before Serb colonization, while 1944 data is recorded after fascists commited genocide against Serbs in Banat. If you have sources with census data, why you do not present data from 1931 census where obviously you would have more Serbs? 212.69.6.213 (talk) 16:46, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I am not the counsel for the defense of balsescu. I guess he doesn´t need any help against your dirty attacks. With this kind of discussing you have disqualificated yourself. There were 16 Croats living in Jabuka in 1921 (between the two world wars), and then in 1946 there were 28 Serbs counted in Jabuka but not one Croat. If this doesn´t ring a bell to you, you are overtaxed in reading statistics. May I .., no, I have to remind you, that the Croats were counted as Serbs, cause the had not left Jabuka but they were not listed in the statistic anymore.
 * Now I understand, why you won´t open an account in Wikipedia. As an IP-hopper  (that´s what you are) you can not be punished by the adminds.--Speidelj (talk) 21:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

And now
For kids and sockpuppets from this page, let start serious discussion. This is Internet source THAT CAN BE OPPENED, so let see what source say: http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:m5yUnACBSbAJ:www.sopancevo.org.yu/30-1-l+jabuka+stratiste&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2

1. "Između dva svetska rata i pored doseljavanja iz Like, Bosne i Crne gore i dalje je najbrojnije Nemačko stanovništvo" (translation: between two world wars, besides settlers who came from Lika, Bosnia and Montenegro, the largest part of population remained German").

2. "1945. započinje kolinizacija Jabuke. Iz svih krajeva tadašnje Jugoslavije pristižu porodice sa samo naj osnovnijim sredstvima za život. Najviše kolonista je iz Krivopalanačkog ali i drugih krajeva Makedonije" (translation: In 1945, colonization of Jabuka started. Families came from all parts of Yugoslavia, most of them from Kriva Palanka and other parts of Macedonia).

3. "Od 1941. do 1944. godine na mestu Stratište po naredbi šefa policije Pančeva ubijeno je više od deset hiljada Srba, Roma i Jevreja" (translation: from 1941 to 1944 on the place stratište more than 10,000 serbs, jews and roma was killed).

So, the serious discussion can start with this question: can YOU (Speidelj, Balcescu, WHO EVER YOU ARE) open this source and see there these bolded sentences. yes or no? 81.18.58.162 (talk) 23:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Your sources can not be opened! I am user speidel, but I do not know who you are.!--Speidelj (talk) 22:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Fine, if I assume your good faith here and if I assume that you really cannot open this source, then I would suggest that you use another Internet browser, since I can open this link in 3 different browsers, including Opera, Firefox, and Internet Explorer. Anyway, I will ask some other users are they able to open this link, and if they are, I will ask them to confirm to you that these sentences are written there. 81.18.62.135 (talk) 19:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

According to the source (German troops are shooting members of resistance movement in Stratište, near Jabuka in 1942) I have looked at the picture. I do not deny anything, but I can not tell the place. There are houses to be seen and a water tower. Where is that place? Not in Jabuka, certainly not. If it is near the monument between Jabuka and Pancevo, than I have to ask, where do the houses and the water tower come from and where are these things now? Look at google earth. Jabuka, Coordinates: 44°55’44,55’’ North and 20°28’06,01’’East. Except the monument there are no buildings to be seen and I do not remember any buildings there. I don´t know, but there is another village named Jabuka in Prijepolje, Serbia. Maybe this helps.--Speidelj (talk) 23:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The photo „Streljanje rodoljuba, Stratište Sept.1942, (2km pre sela Jabuka, iz pravca Pančeva)” was definitely not taken in Jabuka(Banat).I showed it to the president of the Jabuka community in Germany and to the 1. Secretary of that organization. What is called Stratište today, is known as “Kleines Ried” or „mali rit“. The execution there took place in September 1941.--Speidelj (talk) 14:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, the picture WAS definitely taken in Jabuka in Banat because picture description say that it is "2km pre sela Jabuka, iz pravca Pančeva" (2 km before Jabuka, in the direction from Pančevo) and if there is another village Jabuka near Prijepolje, there is certainly not town Pančevo near Prijepolje. And the question whether you (or your friends) would think that this is Jabuka or not is irrelevant since Wikipedia trust to sources, not to unproved stories and what I presented here is exactly one source. 81.18.62.135 (talk) 19:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Finally
The stupid web site is online again - as I assumed, it indeed changed Internet domain from "yu" to "rs", so the new adress is: http://www.pancevo.rs/Jabuka-30-1 So, Speidelj, would you be so kind to read history of Jabuka on this page? thank you very much. 81.18.62.135 (talk) 20:52, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * All your sources are based on the article at the webside [].But it is written without any citation. There are so many errors and mistakes in the article. I will clear it up with the newspaper of Pancevo, „Pancevac”, but it´ll take a little bit of time.--Speidelj (talk) 22:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Congratulations Speidelj, we made a great advance here: you now admit that you can opet this link, you admit that you can read it, and you admit that my edits into this article are not unsourced, but based on this source. So, now, after we settled all this, the only problem that we still have is that you want to dispute the validity of this source. You will certainly agree that this is official web site of Pančevo municipal authorities and data presented in such official sources are always most trusted and regarded as most correct. So, how exactly you know that this page contains errors and mistakes? Why you do not write here to which errors you refer to and why you do not quote here what your own source say about these alleged errors? Let start with 1946 data: if your source say that 28 serbs lived in the village in 1946, how exactly they appeared there according to you if not as part of post-ww2 colonization? 212.69.6.213 (talk) 16:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Ts, ts,..you you are not a good student, cause you have forgotten, that I already told you, that those Serbs, who were sent by the Yugoslavian government, were civil servants like headmaster and notary.--Speidelj (talk) 21:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

First settlers in Jabuka
The Serbian social anthropologists point to a Slavic settlement. Quotation: „Selo je imalo 15 porodica slovenskog porekla”.(HOG Jabuka, 1968. How do you translate this claim?--Speidelj (talk) 22:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I do not dispute your claim, but I point that this source claim that they were Serbs: http://www.pancevo.rs/Jabuka-30-1 I believe that you do not understand the job of Wiki editors: it is not up to you and me to perform censorhip, but to present claims from all sources and all opinions, and I tried exactly that with this sentence: "According to some sources, these first settlers were Serbs, [3] [4] while according to other sources, they might be coming from Romania or Bulgaria. [5]" - I presented here both sources and both opinions and it is exactly in accordance with editing policy of Wikipedia. It is not up to you or to me to present our personal opinions which of these sources is right and which is wrong, not to mention one big difference: my source is available online and everybody (including yourself) can check whether it say what it say, while sources that you presenting to us are not available online and we have only your own word that they contain what you claim, and if I decided to trust to your words, I do not see why you refuse to trust to internet source that I presented to you? 212.69.6.213 (talk) 17:07, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

The internet source you presented to me was written und put into the internet by someone (unkwown) from the city of Pancevo without any citations or referring sources, so it is not a scientific source.--Speidelj (talk) 12:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Don`t give a shit for this stupid clown. He - or whoever - started trolling and editing/ deleting this and related articles years ago. He proclaims to know the truth but in fact he doesn`t have no clue about anything. Must be some kinda GADJO troll or something like that. 84.171.225.200 (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It is not clear at all, what you are talking about.--93.196.74.147 (talk) 16:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Macedonian name in the lead
First, I did not put 'relative majority' in the lead. Second, Naming conventions (geographic names) states that relevant foreign language names may be put in the lead. I don't see why the Macedonian name is not relevant. About one-third of the present-day inhabitants are Macedonian. In the past, the proportion was even larger because many Macedonians settled in the area after WWII, which means the language has historical significance. Macedonians are also an officially recognized minority population in Jabuka. See the 'Culture' section for more; an annual Ilinden celebration, a cultural house named after Kočo Racin, etc. I don't know what more you, anonymous editor, need, or why you're so opposed to the Macedonian name's inclusion in the lead. -- Local hero talk 22:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, you did put 'relative majority' in the lead, check your own change: . As for Naming conventions (geographic names) guideline, it states that "relevant foreign language names may be put in the lead", but this apply to case if there are no such foreign names in the article. Now read whole guideline on Naming conventions (geographic names) and you will also see this: "Alternatively, all alternative names can be moved to and explained in a "Names" or "Etymology" section immediately following the lead, or a special paragraph of the lead; we recommend that this be done if there are at least three alternate names, or there is something notable about the names themselves." Finally, you will see this: "Once such a section or paragraph is created, the alternative English or foreign names should not be moved back to the first line. As an exception, a local official name different from a widely accepted English name should be retained in the lead." From article history it is evident that Macedonian name was moved back to lead by MacedonianBoy in 5 September 2012, contrary to recomendation from the guideline: . Finally to say that I have nothing against Macedonians and that I have only respect for Macedonian people. However, we should not have here an bad precedent that could trigger a POV pushing in articles about some other settlements in Serbia where some people would want to put in lead names in some other languages. Naming guideline is here to assure NPOV approach and we should respect that guideline. 77.105.52.124 (talk) 15:41, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I didn't notice the 'relative' thing when I reverted you. It would, of course, be incorrect for that word to be there. In this situation, there seems to be only one other significant language, not more than 3. Putting the Macedonian name in the lead would certainly not set a precedent for doing so in other articles because this is rather unique in Serbia for having a large historical and present-day Macedonian population. Perhaps a good solution would be simply having the Cyrillic name alone, as was the case in previous revisions of the article. So it'd look like this: Jabuka (Cyrillic: Јабука) is... -- Local hero talk 17:47, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and implemented the aforementioned solution. -- Local hero talk 08:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * All right, it is acceptable. 77.105.60.70 (talk) 21:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Content of Jabuka Wikipedia page
Hello Mr. Saringer (aka AustrianFreedom),

I see that you have been frequently editing the English version of the Jabuka Wikipedia page again. I would like to formally disagree with the content you are presenting to English speaking audieces. I would like you to return the Jabuka site to it's original state. Jabuka was a German speaking town for 180 years. This was a town like any other town..... full of good and bad. The good should not be erased simply because of your specific family situation and past experiences. This is my history also..... and I also have a right to it. I believe their is enough room for both versions of Jabuka's history. If you do not restore the site, I will move this discussion to Wikipedia arbitration..... and if necessary to Austrian courts.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Myhistory44
 * AustrianFreedom has been banned from Wikipedia. Correct whatever you'd like, so long as you can source it reliably.--Ermenrich (talk) 02:42, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

I now see that the page has been restored to an acceptable version. I was referring to the information that Mr Saringer previously created. I previously asked him to remove the offensive information..... which he did for a short time. Thank you for your efforts in correcting this. I may, in the future, add information that will be correctly sourced.

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Jabuka (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:20, 19 April 2022 (UTC)