Talk:Stanislav Sočivica

Serbian propaganda
, until you find a cite in the work of Ivan Lovrić that his family was of Orthodox faith, then it can be add back. However, there's simply no proof he was a Serbian. This is not your first time that you're "making" Serbians using oudated and unreliable sources, also from Serbia (obviously not reliable for WP:NPOV), out of Vlachs and Morlachs from Croatia, as well Bosnia and Herzegovina. Also, this article has nothing to do with Serbia.--Crovata (talk) 22:42, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I want you to prove that the designation "Serb" is Serbian propaganda. is a very interesting statement — you are thereby negating not only the Serb ethnicity of Serbs of Croatia, but of Sočivica (from Herzegovina) as well. I was not aware that this was your ultimate agenda regarding Morlachs, not only to downplay Serb ethnogenesis in Croatia, but basically claim that the Orthodox Slavic people of HR and BiH have nothing to do with Serbs? This is very childish behaviour. Do I really need to explain why Sočivica comes under WPSR scope? --Z oupan  22:43, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I am not negating Serbian ethnic identity influence of the Vlachs/Morlachs, there's simply no evidence those Orthodox/Roman Catholic Vlachs belonged at the time either to Croatian or Serbian ethnic identity corpus. You're not the first time doing oversimplification of the Vlachs/Morlachs origin, like it was done in the past by non-scholars, as well those national-ideological scholars (especially in the 19th century, as well when there was a need in 40s, or 90s, in both Croatia and Serbia). Wikipedia is edited according NPOV - neutrality, ignoring and twisting the neutrality of those articles, and calling those edits my personal "ultimate agenda" you're mature to report your case at the admins noticeboard.--Crovata (talk) 22:54, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Wait. Did you just ask for a primary cite? You just "removed Serbian propaganda and outdated sources". Serb, ethnic Serb, not Serbian. This article has to do with a person whose legacy is part of Serbian literature. Do not remove the Project tag.--Z oupan 22:47, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Part of "Serbian literature" - you mean Montenegrin literature? Find a primary (Lovrić) source cite where he belonged to the Orthodox family, and was an ethnic Serb.--Crovata (talk) 22:54, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, Serbian (and Montenegrin) literature. This is how we are going to do: I will give you a week to refute that he was Orthodox. Remember, you removed it. Kinda hard given the fact that he was born in a Serbian Orthodox village, his brother was the blood brother of another Orthodox, his family took refuge at an Orthodox monastery, etc. There are many secondary sources mentioning him as being Serb, and the already known fact that Morlachs were used for highlanders (predominantly Serbs, Orthodox), does outweigh your unsubstantiated claims.--Z oupan 23:13, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * There's nothing you can give me, this is not kind of deal or gambling, and "outweigh" based on personal conclusions based on unreliable sources (which twist the words of Lovrić 100-300 years after he wrote them). In the late 16th-17th century mostly used for Orthodox (due to social-religious events of the time, Roman Catholic churces were destroyed etc.) Slavic-speaking people who "migrated" to Austrian-Venice territory and had semi-nomadic lifestyle, not Serbs - the term of the Serbs was mostly related with the previous terms Vlachs/Morlachs only after when those Roman Catholic Vlachs/Morlachs became part of Croatian national corpus, while Orthodox Vlachs/Morlachs of Serbian national corpus.--Crovata (talk) 23:30, 7 March 2016 (UTC)