Talk:Serbs/Archive 3

Nationalistic Population Edits Affecting True Sources of Information
Just because someone *things* there are more than 160,000 Serbs in US does not necessarily mean it's true. The numbers that should be posted are the ones that have census reports attached to them. Why somebody is battling the census statistics I do not understand. There seems to be a nationalistic undertone in some of these edits. The ethnic Serb population was approximately a little more than 4 mil in 1920; So it doesn't make sense how it could increase to a whopping 10 million over 80 years (Serbs don't really have high birthrates). The Germany figure is including Kosovars, Montenegrins, Vojvodinars, and maybe even Bosniaks; many of whom are not of the Serb ethnicity. For this reason the 500,000 estimate should be taken with a grain of salt; if logical derivations come into play the real number should stand aroudn 300,000 - 400,000 ETHNIC Serbs tops (theres no German census that reports this so logic has to be used). The US number however has a census and is marked aroud 150,000 which makes perfect sense to me. Also Austria and Australia seems to be a little overrepresented. At best, the ETHNIC Serb population is around 9.0 mil tops. Given the 6,600,000 in Serbia, the 1.6 mil in Bosnia/Croatia, 300 - 400 thousand in Germany, and about 400,000 elsewhere of significant recordings. The 10 million and 11 million marks seem to be severely overestimated. We've dealt with this before on other pages.

Please I urge everyone to just rely on sources for their estimations and educated guesses for Germanys (considering Germany does not report their minorities).

From above: "Without the Yugoslavs, he claims that there were around 5,650,000 Serbs in the world." (1990) What is wrong with this statistic? There's no way it doubled in 10 years (even if you consider that about a million Serbs dont like to be referred to as Serbs)


 * Commenting on only one aspect of this: as I've mentioned several times, here and elsewhere, U.S. census numbers on any Euro-American ethnicity need to be regarded as a minimum. They count only people who self-identify in these terms, so those who don't self-identify are not counted as anything other than just "white". -- Jmabel | Talk 04:54, 24 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree, that is why I left the link for that American Factfinder 2002 (see link/source in table on main page) estimate which takes into account growthrates, so 174,000 Serbians instead of 140,000. However, that same estimate gives some 420,000 Yugoslavs. If one were to divide those proportionally among the Serbs, Slovenes and Croats it would add another 94,000 to the Serbs (22% of Yugoslavs), that would be about 268,000 but that is still considered to be an underestimated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.70.126.30 (talk • contribs) 2Oct 2005


 * I bring peace and joy to all: Ministry for Diaspora of the Government of Serbia plans a census of diaspora. So, in 2007, we will hopefully have official numbers and official estimates. Nikola


 * Which will still be an underestimate but an Serbian and official one so we will not have anyone else but ourselves to blame for it :). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.70.126.30 (talk • contribs) 2Oct 2005


 * Note, Germany has a little over 500,000 Serbs, and 200,000 recently arrived refugees from Kosovo. HolyRomanEmperor 12:06, 24 September 2005 (UTC)


 * The German page (given as link/source) in the table gives citizenship of the 'former-Yugoslavia', says it includes people with 1993-2004 citizenship of Serbia-Montenegro which was known as (the Federal Republic of) Yugoslavia until 2002. That is why I corrected the German figure. And who knows how many Serbs have taken German citizenship? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.70.126.30 (talk • contribs) 2Oct 2005


 * I have just discovered that that USA source file seperates all Slovenians and Croats, distinctivly from Yugoslavs. Most of those Yugoslavs are Serbs (that is the only rational explaination for 300,000 Serbs in Chicago only, and that Rod Blagojević, a Serb is the governer of Illinois, USA.) HolyRomanEmperor 16:48, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

According to the demographics of Yugoslavia there were 8,136,578 Serbs in all of Yugoslavia in 1981, with IMO, at most 500,000 foreign Serbs at that time. It's hard to believe that within 20 years there would be a surge of 2 million extra Serbs, especially considering the population of Serbs DECREASED between 1971 and 1981. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ?? (talk • contribs) late Sept 2005

Recent revision of population statistics
Nikola, nice job on gathering the numbers, but your footnoting method (blind external-style links to named a-elements in the article) is not going to hold up: it requires that the links be in exactly this order, that none ever be interposed, and that no other external links are ever mixed in. Very unstable. I'll do my best to do a quick fix on that, but someone else may also want to have a go at it. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:10, 6 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I have attempted to use Footnote3 system, but couldn't insert template within template, so I had to use links. I don't think that it is a good idea to have them numbered; yes, one has to take care about the order, but it is much smaller a problem than if one enters a reference to Croatia at the top, and now has to renumber all other references. On the other hand, maybe it would be even better if, instead of a reference for each number, we have a "Population references" subsection with the references sorted alphabetically by country, and a link to it from the infobox; but the current system might deter vandalism better so I'm not sure. Nikola 10:10, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

I had just purchased "Tatsachen über Deutschland" - "Presse- und Informationsamr der Bundersregierung" containing (next to other things) a detalied 1998 population statistics, including estimates for as far as 2003. One of the main editors was the 1998 Nobel leaurate (in Physics) Professor Horst Störmer. Give me a day or two and... HolyRomanEmperor 18:53, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Victory! "Schon seigt langem bilden Türken mit 2.107 Milionen die grösste Gruppe unter den Ausländern, gefolgt von Personnen aus Serbien/Montenegro deren Zahl rund 721,000." It goes on and on claiming that from Bosnia and Herzegovina are 281,400; 206,600 Croats; 608,000 Italians; 363,000 Greeks; 185,000 Austrians; 132,000 Spanish; 132,000 Portuguese; 115,000 British; 113,000 Dutch; 104,000 French; 283,000 Polish; 95,000 Romanians and 110,000 Americans. 200,000 Serbo-Montenegrins are from Kosovo. Other than that, 521,000 are not from Kosovo; meaning that counting Albanians, Muslims, Hungarians, Romanians and others next to Serbs in that number, could be compared with a little over 200,000 citizens from Croatia being Serbs. Besides, from 1999 to the present, the population of Albanians on Kosovo has increased; and next to resourseful Serb (in Germany) sources, there are none about German Albanians. HolyRomanEmperor 11:25, 8 October 2005 (UTC)


 * OK, now that we have three completely independent sources, one of them heavily anti-Serbian, which give 700,000 number, I believe that we may use that number as the only one, especially given that the other source only gives number of people from SCG (not counting their descendants etc.) and it doesn't say which period it covers. Nikola 20:47, 8 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Could you give more information about the book? Who is the main editor, or at least the publisher, when and where it was published, does it have ISBN, on what page have you found the information? Is this the book featured at http://www.tatsachen-ueber-deutschland.de ? Nikola 20:05, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Serbian minority in Albania
I would be surprised if there is really a Serbian minority in Albania. I believe there is a few Serbian people in Albania, but they don't constitute a minority. And the number of 37,000 Serbs living in Albania is exaggerated. 213.100.205.149 22:13, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * According to the book, the number was given by Albanian delegation on the UN General Assembly of 1990. Nikola 06:21, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * According to the CIA World Factbook, 95 percent of the population is Albanian, 3 percent Greek and 2 percent comprising of Vlachs, Roma, Serbs and Bulgarians. these, 70 percent are Muslim, 20 percent Albanian Orthodox, and 10 percent Roman Catholic.


 * Albania's population by ethnic groups, according to the Albanian Institute of Statistics 1989:


 * Greek, 58 758
 * Macedonian, 4 697
 * Serbs, Montenegrins, 100
 * Others, 1 262
 * Albanian, 3 117 600


 * Nikola, you see it's impossible that there is 37, 000 Serbs in Albania. 213.100.205.149 08:54, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Nikola, For Your Information! User:213.100.205.149 is identical with User:L'Houngan, who has been indefinitely blocked on Swedish Wikipedia for vandalism, abuse of other wikipedians and extensive use och sock puppets. Probert 09:18, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Strange then how user L'Houngan on swedish wikipedia is editing the articles? User Probert you are identical with User:Torvindus and sv:User:Lamré who has been indefinitely blocked on Swedish Wikipedia for vandalism, extream abuse of other wikipedians, anti- Albanian remarks and extensive use of sock puppets. --213.100.205.149 13:54, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Probert, Thanks for the notice, I'll have that in mind. Nikola 18:16, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

What about sv:User:Arvanítis, who promotes Grekisk propaganda at the expense of us Albanians? REX 14:21, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * It is impossible to reason with User:213.100.205.149, who is banned indefinitely on Swedish Wikipedia. He is a rabid Albanian nationalist and has been vandalizing articles in addition to abusing other wikipedians. This user, who is identical with User:L'Houngan and several other sock puppets on sv:, is a hostile and cunning troll and should be banned for all eternity. Probert 14:32, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * User Probert is user Torvindus who have personal attack and made extream anti-Albanian remarks against swedish wikipedians of Albanian origin. Many of those users have left Wikipedia because of this, [sv:User:Albanau]], sv:User:Alban, sv:user:Arnauti, Mr beni and many others. And for the record, my IP is not banned and niether is my account on swedish Wiki. Also wan't to add that user Probert doesn't accept that Francesco Crispi had Arbëreshë origin, because of his evil view on Albanians. 213.100.205.149 16:36, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * What a load of crap, just have a look at this: sv:Användardiskussion:213.100.205.149. Why do you think the sock puppet image is there? User:213.100.205.149 is the sock puppet master of User:L'Houngan, User:Albanau and User:217.73.101.30 as well as sv:Användare:213.100.205.149, sv:Användare:Albanau, sv:Användare:L'Houngan, sv:Användare:Arnauti, sv:Användare:Piana, and the funniest of all, sv:Användare:217.73.101.30 - claiming to be some "Lennart Haglund"-character in Varberg, Sweden. Probert 16:51, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Tut tut! Anyway, I think that it is perfectly clear that 213.100.205.149 has a point, regardless if he is a sockpuppet or not. Probert, what you are doing qualifies as wiki-stalking. There are NOW (the CIA World Factbook is current) not that many Serbs in Albania. I don't know what it might have been like in the past, but the latest statistics do not suggest 37,000 Serbs. REX 17:24, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * So what happened to 36,900 Serbs in the last 15 years? Nikola 18:08, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I'll give an educated guess: the same thing that happened to the vast majority of Greeks in Albania. After the fall of Communism, they fled the country to avoid starvation. REX 18:32, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * There was a lot of refugees in previous decade, but I am certain we would notice this upsurge :) Do you have a link to some reliable website which states how many refugees there were or how many Serbs are in Albania now? Nikola 19:12, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

All I know is that there can't be many Serbs in Albania now. Ethnologue seems to suggest that Serbian is spoken in Southwest Albania, 2 or 3 villages, and some in the city. That can't be many, and according to the CIA World Factbook seems to suggest that Vlachs Gypsies, Serbs, Macedonians and Bulgarians all together form about 2% of Albania's population. REX 19:37, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Image vote
There has been a revert war concerning which image we should use to illustrate the article, and I should really have thought of this before. I think that the vote should start after each author comments on own image. I also think it wouldn't be fair if authors would vote for their own images. Nikola 19:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Nikola's image
This image has clear copyright status, and I have very carefully selected persons who will appear on it (it is detailed on image's page). On the other hands, Nikola's and Milla's pictures are not the best, but such is the price of clear copyright status... Nikola 19:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC) 

Pokrajac's image
I think that this picture is best choice. As you can see, here are icluded really most famous Serbs all over the world. I think that Divac is better choice than Mila, who is not verry much popular in Serbia, and we can not say that she is famous Serb. Religion, freedom, science, literature, and sport are most important elements in history of one nation. Antidote's image is not nice. Here we can see too many faces. We can put faces of all Serbs?:) Two lines of pictures is not good solution. The copyright status of these images is clear. --M. Pokrajac 10:32, 18 October 2005 (UTC) 

Antidote's image
 This image represents Serbs of whom played an enormous role in the formation of Serb culture, science, and art. The copyright status is taken care of. Each image represents a famous Serb in a lesser known portrait/picture in order to illustrate the purview of the person's contribution. These images also display the reverence of which people treated the subject; note the sketch of Nikola Tesla and the portrait of Karadzic. The image displays a Serb scientist, inventor, linguist, military figure, Saint, author, revolutionary, and a Montenegrin hero. The geography of their origins also exemplifies the notion of a smaller Serbia outside of a Serbia, with a Bosnia birth, a Herzegovina birth, a Vojvodina birth, a Croatia birth, a Montenegro birth, and a motherland birth. The people's faces are easily viewed and can be enlarged upon clicking.

If a few images bother you but you like the rest as a whole, mention it and I will easily replace those selected images with better ones of the subject. The image can also be easily resized if anyone wishes. Antidote 19:48, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Could Antidote's image also include the two present famous Serbs? And, the previous images of Ivo Andric and Nikola Tesla are far better than Antidote's. HolyRomanEmperor 21:36, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Can you name me two present Serbs that have had any lasting influence? If so, I'll add them, but IMO Divac is not exactly a great choice. I'll change the Tesla one (I like thing one a lot: http://www.classictesla.com/photos/tesla/portret3.jpg), but what's wrong with Ivo Andric? This is a younger picture of him and represents his looks better. 72.144.150.139 00:23, 18 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I think Antidote's image is just too much. I'm not against any of the individual inclusions, just the presence of so many. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:33, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

The Czechs and Georgians pages have the same thing. What's wrong with representing the nationality in the best way possible? 72.144.150.139 19:16, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I think that Mila Jovovich and .... hm.... say.... Mateja Kesman are a must-have. You should evict Duke Mišić, and replace him with Milutin Milanković. And zou should also evict someone to be replaced bz the byzantine emperor Constantine XI. HolyRomanEmperor 20:12, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Andric, Tesla, karadjordje, Karadzic, Boscovic, and Saint Sava are virtual must haves. We don't need Misic but he's a good figure in terms of military. Njegos isn't necessary and could be replaced my Jovovich or Kezman. Having Constantine XI is getting too inclusive; plus that'd be three half-Serbs, which makes it look bad IMO.

For those of you who think 8 images is too many; we can bring it to four for the main image, and four on the list of Serbs page. 72.144.150.139 21:16, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Emperor Constantine spoke Serbian language. He called himself not Paleologus (Greek) but Dragas (Serb). HolyRomanEmperor 12:57, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Milutin Milanković is a must-have. HolyRomanEmperor 19:43, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

I really don't want Constantine. I wouldnt mind including Milankovic but then we're seriously overdoing the scientists. We'd have three. No?

I just made an image with the following people in order:

Sava, Milankovic, Tesla, Karajdorde, Vuk, Rudjer, Andric, and Jovovich. Will that be satisfactory?

This order of pictures is not historical, and it is quite homely. --M. Pokrajac 20:34, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Since when is it a requirement that the pictures must be in historical order? I don't see how the image you posted is any less homely. Antidote 21:12, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

That does not go with my suggestion. I suggested that the upper should be Serbs that are/were world-famous and lower Serbs famous among Serbs, only. And I think that from left to right, we should align that historically (besides, the picture of Ivo Andric while he was young is much better than that new one; and Mila Jovovich doesn't look good on that picture) HolyRomanEmperor 14:33, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

OK, final order (if you don't like it after this; make an example with my images):

Rudjer, Tesla, Milankovic, Jovovich (world famous)

Sava, Karadorde, Vuk, Andric (Serb famous) Antidote 16:30, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

We have three other pictures. We must vote to get concrete choice. --M. Pokrajac 19:11, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Vote for Antidote's. Just, be dareful to put the most charismatic pictures as possible. Although, I think that a famous Serb bastekball (or football) player should be also included (my original idea was five; yours + a famous sports-player and Constantine XI) The picture includes ethnic Serbs all except Ivo Andric. Is he a must-have? HolyRomanEmperor 16:19, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Alright, I put it in order and added Constantine + Mateja Kezman. I kept Ivo Andric, since he represents an author, but dropped Vuk Karadzic for Misic since we needed an armyman of some sort. Wikipedia is running out of space with all these Serb images...

Antidote 06:05, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

OK, but I fail to see why is a soldier more important that a reformer (father) of a language... HolyRomanEmperor 18:10, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Fixed. ok? Antidote 00:15, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

It's OK now. I guess I agree that it seems a bit too crowded, but seems also pretty much reasonable. It's good enough to be placed onto the page. I had already complained that a better picture of Mila Jovovich could be found, but we should leave that for someone else, some time later.... HolyRomanEmperor 13:24, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

A writer is useful, yes; but according to my opinion, Ivo Andrić should be placed on the page Croats (perhaps Mišić could be returned in his place). But weve had too many changes, and I think that this one currently is enough to settle for now. HolyRomanEmperor 13:28, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Ivo Andric wrote predominately in Serbian and was a sort of Serb nationalist. His father was a Catholic, and this is taken by many to mean that he was a Croat, when infact Andric's descendents were Catholicized Serbs. He probably had Croatian ancestry from his mother's side, but I don't see how that wouldn't earn him a place on this list anyway. Also, I think this pic of Jovovich is the best because it varies a bit with the dark-hair dark-eyes of the other people on the list. 72.144.150.50 17:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Just my two dimes - I'm against of putting the image of Mila Jovovic in this picture, since she doesn't even Speak Serbian. -- Obradovi&#263; Goran ( t al k  21:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Here wikipedia entry says she speaks Serbian fluently: Mila Jovovic 72.144.71.194 19:32, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

OK to put up now?

Alright, since no one's responding I'm putting it up. I suppose you can take it off again if there's a problem. 72.144.172.181 02:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Why not add that pic now? HolyRomanEmperor 22:26, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Someone took it off. 72.144.172.181 05:55, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, there is no justification to put this picture on article. We dont have majority. --M. Pokrajac 00:18, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

I knew you would not be mature enough to admit defeat. No one is willing to vote (clearly) since this has been up here for more than a week. Your image was not accepted therefore it will not be shown. That simple. Antidote 19:56, 5 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Defeat? Hey man, can you count? Only you and HolyRomanEmperor are supporting your image! Nikola, Goran and I were agains. If you think that voting is finished, cool! I will revert Nikola's image. Your image was not accepted too. Voting is finished... --M. Pokrajac 00:22, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah yes. Jmabel was agains too, sorry. :) --M. Pokrajac 00:26, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

It's a simple concept to understand 1 person agreed on my image 0 on yours 0 on the other No one else is voting

What do you think that means? Your image in no way or fashion was agreed on. I'll take off mine but definitely take off yours. 70.146.75.245 15:23, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Please don't accuse good-faith edits of vandalism
I personally don't greatly care which image is used. I gave my opinion, which appears to be more or less the same as M. Pokrajac's, and on the same basis, but I don't feel much stake in this choice. On the other hand, as an admin, I feel a lot of stake in the matter of false accusations of vandalism. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:55, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) A good-faith edit that you happen not to agree with is not vandalism.
 * 2) A legitimate content dispute is not vandalism.
 * 3) Assuming you would like other editors to be able to trust your edit summaries, please do not make false accusations of vandalism. Usually, most of us assume that when and experienced Wikipedia editor claims to be reverting vandalism, we don't need to check the edit. If you abuse this in your edit summaries, we stop being able to assume that.

Reverting first (Nikola's) image of Serbs
I cant see reason to take away this picture from this article! Everything except this is vandalism. Since we dont have majority for any of this 3 pictures, Nikola's image will be here. His image is first made image who have advantage for this. Until we adapt new image, this pic must be here. --M. Pokrajac 23:03, 4 November 2005 (UTC)