Talk:Tram 11

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Tram 11. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nacional.hr/clanak/13652/novac-je-ubio-hrvatski-hip-hop
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120216024048/http://www.jutarnji.hr/hip-hop-scena-u-hrvatskoj/265352 to http://www.jutarnji.hr/hip-hop-scena-u-hrvatskoj/265352/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:43, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Could admins restrict IP edits for this article?
Could admins restrict IP edits here as article is fairly controversial due to recent homophobic, nationalistic and pronazi lyrics and also follow-up statements by the frontman of the group. Recent IP edits and new accounts have all been supressing such info. If someone still wants to contribute to the article using IP editing I am supportive of having those edits here in the Talk page. --Zblace (talk) 12:19, 26 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I do agree with you that the article should be protected for IP-users, since currently the band is a "hot topic" and I noticed that there have been IP-reverts. Even on hr.wiki I had to lock the page for a day because of an edit-war.
 * However, claiming that their new album contains "pronazi lyrics" is a WP:LIVE violation on Wikipedia. On all language editions, not only on en.wiki. Yes, their latest album "Jedan i jedan" has caused a controversy in the music industry and society, but there is no space for self-interpretations of the lyrics in Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia is not a news portal and it is not a place for any POV. The article is not supposed to present someone any light, it must be neutral by any means and neutrality can be achieved by naming all facts. Facts, not theories or self-speculations.
 * Content needs to be sourced and verfiable (WP:VERIFY), such claims:, , , , , ] etc. cannot stay on Wikipedia and especially not without a trustful source. Without sources and without a neutral writing style, such defamating statements need to be urgently removed according to WP:LIVE.
 * As the (new) "controversy" sub-section perfectly mentions, some people see the lyric about the "Jasenovac myth" as an "argument frequently misused by some Serbian politicians" while other claim that the lyric is "holocaust denial" - what is the truth and what is not, is not the job for Wikipedians to evaluate, since original research (WP:OR) is strictly prohibited. --Koreanovsky (talk) 19:22, 26 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I will ask for opinions on the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents page, because WP:BLP are a very sensitive topic. Best regards, Koreanovsky (talk) 19:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Koreanovsky they are in full time in media for past 3 days not for music quality production but _only_ because of hate speech which goes beyond Jasenovac concentration camp claims (their text suggest that people will be pushed under a tram, they will f**k female celebraties and more...) and explicitly celebrating in company of most prominent neo-nazi in Croatia. I am lost to your arguments what proof do you need? Is balance of neutrality made out of giving equal space to both victims and perpetrators? I really donot mind your conservative and religious stands, but this call for violance wrapped in free Trump like free speech and mediocre hiphop from 90s trying to ride rightwing populist train back to fame. --Zblace (talk) 22:55, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Quote: "I am lost to your arguments what proof do you need?"

This is not about "proving me" something, this is about the rules of this project. Please read once again what I wrote and take a look at what WP:LIVE is about. I am quoting from WP:LIVE: "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." WP:LIVE is not just some random wiki-intern policy "that just exists", it is something really sensitive and serious that can cause legal issues. WP:LIVE is something we do not joke or mess with! Material about living persons added to Wikipedia page must be written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability, neutrality, and avoidance of original research. Adding something sensitive without sources in the intro is a WP:LIVE violation.

This is not my personal opinion, these are the rules of this project. You can write about the controversy that is currently going on, but you have to stick to the three core content policies of Wikipedia (WP:NPOV, WP:V and WP:OR) when you are doing so.

Quote: "I really donot mind your conservative and religious stands..."

Ummm... Okay? What has this to do with me? What has my private life to do with the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia? What has this discussion about this controversy to do with "my conservative and religious stands"? And what are even my personal stands? Do not get personal here. --Koreanovsky (talk) 19:25, 29 January 2022 (UTC)


 * @Koreanovsky I will not comment on the rulles you quote as I do not have problems with them, but with interpretation and application of such. I think you portrait yourself as rules knowing and following person, but in practice you bend them just in more sophisticated ways. Like you did in Croatian Wikipedia through forming a separate article on the Album (which is only worth notability in discussing its controversy), but otherwise has no musical following even on most right-wing part of population if you check youtube statistics. Anyway you an admin there so you get a break, but do not asume same here. --Zblace (talk) 06:15, 8 February 2022 (UTC)