Talk:Jovan I. Deretić

Please do not remove maintenance tags
Placing the maintenance tag is not a reflection on the subject or a judgment on the subject's importance or worth. These tags serve to alert administrators and other editors of issues that may need to be addressed. With regard to living persons, these tags are especially important because of issues that Wikipedia has had in the past with potentially slanderous information being inserted. See the current policy on biographies of living persons for more information. Specifically, biographies should be substantiated with relevant third-party coverage in reliable sources, and this biography has not had that substantiation as of yet. The subject's own works are not such sources. Thank you and I look forward to seeing such sourcing for this article. Eggishorn (talk) 15:16, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Removal of content and citations
I've removed the historical text not relevant to the events in this man's life, also the citations given were a blog, a dead link and Catholic encyclopedia with no mention of the BLP subject. Please read WP:BLP and WP:RS and let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss anything. Thank you.-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 19:11, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Removed non-compliant source
I removed this source because it is not WP:RS or WP:BLP compliant. The source is a political statement by the subject himself published in a non-notable POV driven website. That does not count as a reliable source to verify anything about the subject or his notability. We need secondary sources such as books and mainstream newspapers etc.-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 16:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Notability
The subject appears to be an author so he may meet the notability requirements per WP:PROF or WP:BOOK. Any comments from others?-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 17:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I have added two references I have been able to find in English-language academic literature to Deretic. One a mention in a literary studies journal and one a news report form BBC Monitoring. These primary sources may not be acceptable, but there are the only reliable source mentions I have been able to find. Eggishorn (talk) 19:57, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * A comment about the Worldcat search above. There is an apparently-unrelated professor of Serbian literature that is named Jovan Deretić or possibly Jovan I. Deretić.  Most of the titles associated with Jovan Deretić concerning Serbian literature are likely this professor Deretić.  The Jovan Deretić of this article is clearly the nationalist theorist, and I was unable to substantiate any of the works claimed in previous editions.  They do not appear to even have been granted ISBN's by the Serbian National Library.  It is possible they are the equivalent of self-published, but I could not find them.  --Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:29, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your research and contributions! As you say there may be two Deretic's and the books may be self-pub. So he may not meet WP standards. For that reason I'd like to leave the banner until we have a clear proof one way or another. Thanks. -- — Keithbob • Talk  • 14:58, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Possible source
I have also found the following, and I am not sure about whether it merits inclusion or how to include it. This passage is from, but it is in itself an internal citation to a Serbian book: Markovic, Goran, 2000, Godina dana, Belgrade, Forum pisaca. He was speaking about some Serbon Makeridov, a conqueror who lived long before Alexander the Great and conquered much more territory than him ... That Serbon, the father of all nations, was a Serb. That is to say, all of his descendants, or rather all known peoples, have a Serbian origin. Contemporary Serbs, in fact, are just some of the many Serbs who, over time, became Greeks and Celts and so on. Serbs, according to this lively old fellow, are not a nation but a race. In fact, why hide it, all Indo-European peoples have Serbian origins.

Even that lesser conqueror than Serbon, Alexander, was named Aleksandar Karanovic and he was of Serbian origin too. He conquered the world with an army that was recruited from areas settled by Serbs. our ancestors were so brave. And the most beautiful girls, who can be seen on ancient Greek vases, were also Serbs, there is indisputable evidence for that.

About this doctor. Of course, Deretic has the right to assert whatever he likes, just like the audience has the right to believe it or, like me, simply to ignore it. But [here] something else is in question: the context of the story. It was disgusting, and at the same time typical. The host of the program, a Serb primitive who is delighted by every Serbian heraldic symbol, even completely nebulous ones, and who triumphantly grins over every bit of 'evidence,' even the most suspicious, of the Serbian origin of everyone and everything, and his interlocutor ... were perfect partners in this pig's race of nationalism.

There are obviously multiple problems with this source (it is a primary source, the journal is a RS, but the quoted material may not come from one, it uses internal citation, it expresses obvious bias, etc.) but it is the only English-language reliable source I can find that deals with the pseudo-historical claims that apparently make Deretic notable in any way.

Furthermore, this journal article contains a passing footnote mention that the "charlatan" Jovan E. Deretic should not be confused with Jovan Deretic (no middle E.) who is the subject of one of the only two other cites I have found.

--Eggishorn (talk) 20:33, 12 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Since nobody has opposed it, I will add this information to the article. I will wait a couple of days, though, in case anyone has objections.  --  Eggishorn   (talk)   (contrib)  19:06, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Ambiguity
As mentioned above in the "notability" section, there are apparently two Jovan Deretićs. This Jovan Deretić is a nationalist theorist who has been mentioned in reliable sources (including Russian REN TV). The other Jovan Deretić is apparently a professor of Serbian literature, but about whom I have found no information beyond titles of published works. I do not know what the general approach to possible disambiguation in such situations is, but since the professor and the nationalist are both minimally-notable, yet the nationalist is at least mentioned, I have not created a dab. Comments on this approach are invited. --Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:34, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, a dab page would be good to avoid confusion. Even if one does not have an article they still could be listed on the dab page.-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 15:05, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Dab page created -- Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:37, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * No. We simply do not need a disambiguation page. Even if someone creates an article about the professor, we still do not need a dab. When there are just two to be disambiguated, we create hatnotes using the about template or similar. If you really think that the prof. is notable enough for an article, you may add the hatnote now with a redlink in it. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:12, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, that's clarified. --Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:36, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Recent additions
I've done some copy editing for tone (ie remove "prolific" and other adjectives) and cut back on some of the off topic text. A BLP is not a place to report or discuss Serb history and not even the place to discuss Deretic's views of history UNLESS they have been widely reported (which I don't see any indication of so far). Since I cannot access the cited sources, I've asked for quotations from the sources be placed inside the citations so any editor can verify. I know this is a lot of work and you have done so much already, so I thank you very much in advance :-) What we really need for this BLP is info about his life, things he did ie birth info, education, publications, career positions etc. If its not available then at some point this article may need to be considered for deletion. But let's wait and see, maybe some sources are around. Cheers!-- — <b style= "color:#090;">Keithbob</b> •  Talk  • 15:05, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for your help and encouragement.--Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:12, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank YOU! for all your research and efforts to improve the article and WP in general :-) --<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif"> — <b style= "color:#090;">Keithbob</b> •  Talk  • 17:46, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Non existence of proof about a statement
Either someone shows indisputable proof that the person is or has worked within or has collaborated with the Serbian or Russian academy of science and arts, or quit making up stuff. It's simple as that. A simple link to the academies website should do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.246.60.166 (talk) 22:15, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Engineer and Historian
He studied engineering to have money to study history - according to his own words! And, he studied in the USA, THE HISTORY! WHY CALL HIM PSEUDOhistorian? Are some Vatican's criminals working on this page?
 * Its because he spreads false information about history. Also, blaming "the vatican" for why he is not considered a historian is hilarious Ioe bidome (talk) 20:15, 12 September 2023 (UTC)