Talk:Milorad Ekmečić

Negative comments from first FAC
The following comments were made regarding the first FAC for this article (see here). I am reproducing them here so that they can be assessed and addressed on the talk page insofar as they can be:

All in all, very far from Wikipedia's best work and neutral point of view. These comments were made by MareBG.
 * 1) There is far too much focus on negative aspects of his career.
 * 2) There is almost zero text regarding why his body of work matters and what he achieved as a scholar during his research, which led to several significant national awards. How can we have a FA without anything of note about "30 good years" of his career?
 * 3) Highly reliable "Vreme" magazine calls Ekmecic "notable representative of Serbian critical school".
 * the Vreme obituary is already used in the article, but I somehow missed that initial assessment of him. Added. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:59, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Street is named after him, it's not "proposed". Please do your research.
 * This has already been added, with a ref to a Balkan Insight article. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:46, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) There is a 272 pages book titled "Pečat Milorada Ekmečića" (Seal/imprint of Milorad Ekmečić) which covers his life and work in great details. It is no used nor even mentioned here.
 * 2) Work by Christian Axboe Nielsen can not be used to give a general overiw of his work. She is more focused on politics in her work and is not a scholar of note. Ekmecic has more citations and greater bibliography. That aside, we need far better and stronger sources in order to present her view in Wiki voice.
 * 3) Ekmečić was buried at the Alley of Distinguished Citizen
 * Added, with ref to a Politika article. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:44, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Many of his interesting views about history and geopolitics are not reprsented. In hist interview for Pečat Ekmečić,interview for Pečat a historian and uni. professor for 40 years makes some great observations, claims and notes about history. For example - he claims that there is very little chance for WWIII and explains why. That is just an example, the point is - being adviser for Karadžić is important but his scholary work is far more important.
 * 2) Claiming that he produces "pseudohistory" lacks definitive reliable sources, sorry.
 * 3) According to the Serbian historian Olivera Milosavljević, Ekmečić believed that the Serbian nation "must unite to a higher degree than it is now. The rest of Yugoslavia, which would add Serbian parts from Croatia, as a separate body, is one of the closest solutions" Could you provide the quote in Serbian?
 * 4) Check more on his scholary work here.
 * 5) BU professor writes about his body of works and gives a possitve assesement here.

I plan to work through these points over the next few weeks with a view to improving the article and preparing it for another run at FAC. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:34, 21 May 2023 (UTC)