User:PaxEquilibrium/Case/Emir Arven

PaxEquilibrium on Emir Arven
Here (Regarding genocide, Serbia is the only country in the world with the certificate by ICJ which says Serbia violated the Genocide Convention. And Serbs or their Army is the only Army which commited genocide, dolus specialis, in the modern world. It is also rude to talk about WWII, because chetnics were fascists who commited terrible crimes in Easter Bosnia against Bosniak population. My cousines were killed in Foča during WWII by chetnics.) and here (Just the truth, which is terrible. My people didn't commit genocide, but Serb Army did. Saying that truth, established by world's highest courte, is not hate speech, but history fact. Emir Arven 14:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)) the user connected the Bosnian Genocide from the Bosnian war with a Bosnian Muslim writer that identified himself as a Serb (Meša Selimović).

He wrote this (As you are aware nothing good was produces by them. The strongest party in Serbia now is Serb Radical Party (neo-fascists). Serbs started wars with all other nations, Albanians, Croats, Bosniaks, at the beginning with Slovenia also. And they always do the same thing. Discuss about Bosniaks or Croats who are allegedly Serbs. Discuss about the Balkans as Serb land. Always about the history and land etc. Aren't you tired of all that? I am just saying that Serbia will lose Kosovo because of Serb intellectuals...Emir Arven 14:20, 12 March 2007 (UTC)) and this after I inclined that no one is perfect, and that so can neither he be; he responded with a weird nationalist comment about this ethnic group.

The House of Kotromanić article is an article on a Medieval South Slavic Bosnian family. Here the user removed the mention "..Serbian" and noted in the Edit summary as "..correcting the link.." The reason of the removal was likely just because of the factual word (Serbian). Here he reverted the edit and wrote in the edit summary (well, you linked Serbia to Bosnia implying that Bosnia was a part of Serbia?!) If he even read the actual sentence, he would've noticed that it implied that Serbia was a part of Bosnia, rather. The dispute was ridiculous, over a dull wikilink, and I am seriously worried if the user creates problems of this magnitude due to the word "Serbian" over a plain wiki-link, who knows how far he'd go. Here and here he edited to a proposed compromise (putting the Serbian crown at the end, marginalizing it as possibly incorrect) and put "source needed" for the argument (and sources have been given to him over the whole year's time in numerous previous arguments). The user in question notes all the time that his knowledge of Medieval Bosnian history is high, much more than the that of the Serbs, but everyone who knows a little about King Tvrtko knows that the crown he took was a double crown (Serbo-Croat: Sugubi vijenac).

After I proposed on his talk page not to use double standards (he insisted that in the article Mehmed-paša Sokolović, all mentions of his Serbian origin be removed and just put "Bosnian", so I asked him to remove "Bosniak" from Husein Gradaščević and replace it with "Bosnian"). He refused and kept refusing in a slightly uncivil comment, writing that I first have to put "Bosnian" on the Ivo Andrić article, who is not at all a somewhat controversial person like the other two.

He made a major edit on the 7th Muslim Brigade and the revert-war he was/is leading there is highly controversial.

Here on User talk:Bosniak's talk page he wrote: "Ustashoids [pejorative for an ethnic group]  in action.


 * I would like to warn you, that user Ivan Kricancic, look at his korisničku page in his mad fanaticism he goes from picture to picture regarding Bosnia and nominates them for deletion. He often does that unsigned: 58.165.115.192. I know it is hard with dumb-asses, but the generate is sick and in that way he deleted many articles on srebrenica. Emir Arven 08:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Here on a Serbian-Bosnian medieval King, he replaced the "History of the Serbs" category with "Bosniak history" and before "History of Serbia" with "History of Bosniaks". I believe that (as I will prove in the next following lines) that the sole reason of this edit was because it stood "Serbian". Here on the same article (Stjepan Ostoja) he removed every Serbian category, and replaced that he was a Serbian ruler with him "ruling over Serbian territories" and also removed the Cyrillic version of the title just because the Serbian language uses Cyrillic (and yet that very King's native name was in none other than Cyrillic). On Talk:Stjepan_Ostoja he placed a highly uncivil and insulting comment regarding my alleged "forgery" of sources which will be discussed below - note: I explained the situation numerous times but the user chose to ignore, primarily because he believed that I am of Serb ethnicity. An almost identical type of incivility was repeated on the talk page of the Prijezda I article and on Talk:Prijezda_II as well.

On another article about a Medieval Bosnian ruler (Stephen I of Bosnia) he replaced all categories related to Croats and Serbs, replacing them with the "Bosniak history" category. He wrote a highly uncivil comment in the Edit summary: ''Serb user is trying to deny Bosniak history! Again! Bosniak history is history related to Bosnia! HolyRomanEmperor should be warned! even though I asked him for precisely (I counted) 37 times not'' to call me that way. Then again the very same thing later (Serb user continues to deny Bosniak history, first he put false sources, second he removed cathegory. This shows his motive.) and one new thingy (still this Serb user spread false or unproven information). It is to my belief that the user thinks (that) he will easily discredit me pointing out that I am "of Serb ethnicity", thinking (or as it seems being convinced) that the administrators all share his stereotype. On the talk page of this article, he wrote: "..Serb sources are mostly based on mythology and nationalism. That is just a pure fact..., among other highly uncivil and to an extent racist comments on Serbs; in general the user proudly expresses that things written by ethnic Serbs are not reliable. In all of these edit wars, Emir refused to discuss at the talk page(s) like I asked him, and constantly resorted to pushing his version.

Stephen II of Bosnia
Emir Arven started a similar war over this medieval bosnian ruler. The ruler in question [ converted] from Orthodoxy to Catholicism. As Emir did not believe in this, I gave him a book (written by one of the best Yugoslavian historians, on purpose a Serbian historian, to see the user's reaction) and chose not to supply him with the precise page. As I feared, and as can be seen here, Emir Arven confirmed my fears and wrote this: 'Sern nationalist Vladimir Corovic, and his history of Serb people. That book is nationalistic crap.' and continued to deny that he's a qualified historian. Although Vladimir Ćorović indeed mentions this, he does not mention it in this book - my plan (trap), unjust as it may seem, worked perfectly, as Emir Arven perfectly revealed (note: not violating WP:CIVIL and WP:POV right now) that he hates Serbs extremely. After Emir discovered this - he even sourced his own claims from that book subsequently. :)

He expressed a similar POV on Tvrtko I of Bosnia. Here he replaced all Serb-related sources (of which two were first-class and two low-rated) with a single Bosniac nationalist source.

Mehmed-paša Sokolović
This is a huge subject, so it demands its own sub-page. If the talk page of this article is carefully inspected, a wide array of uncivil comments can be seen. It has been expressed over and over and over again at the talk page; and supported by most international sources, but Emir Arven kept on insisting that Mehmed was a Bosniak, rather than a Serb.

This is his first edit, where he replaced "Serbian" with "Christian" and removed the notice that AFAIK Mehmed's brother rejuvenated the Serbian Church. Here is his second edit, where he indeed did give a source - but at the same time wrote: ''..he renewed the Serbian Orthodox Church in the Peć Patriarchate with allegedly his brother Makarije Sokolović as the Patriarch in 1557. '''On the other hand Bosniak historians consider that above thesis is never proven. They think it is another Serb myth mixed with nationalism and anachronism'.. Here and at numerous other places, Emir Arven showed that sources composed by ethnic Bosniacs are far more reliable than sources composed by ethnic Serbs (which are, according to him, as expressed before, ALL LIES). Although a lengthy discussion already started, Emir Arven chose to ignore it and continued an edit war pushing this (his) version: here, here and most notably here; leaving a special notice "..According to Serb authors." and a footnote to the bottom (with the text that I already posted to the above), but definitely insinuating that the claims shouldn't be trusted because ethnic Serbs wrote that and because ethnic Bosniaks deny that it's true. He also wrote in the edit summary: ..rv, dont delete the book that I provided as a source as it is very relevant unlike Serb mythological sources; now it is obvious that Serb users spread lies for instance regarding his name and familiy..

At the talk page, a whole world of sources was presented (varying across different western, northern, souther and eastern experts on the subject; including the very Turkish government [successor of the Ottoman Empire, the article deals about an Ottoman official]), Emir Arven abandoned his pursuit to present Mehmed as a "Bosniak" and ever since then he acts as a neutralist, claiming that his origin ..cannot be known.. and insists (up to this very day) that an ambiguous "Bosnian" should be put. Such an example is this edit of his. I suppose that this is Plan B; after it was proven that his claims were incorrect, let us just make him not Serb. The fact that Mehmed-pasa might've been a Serb seems to him so tragic that he sacrifices the whole article just to revert to his stub, old version (destroying a bunch of the article - and this is not the first place, as shown above. In the edit summary, he wrote: ..rv, fairy tale.. After warned by an administrator, he does it again.

Here he reverts again - but shockingly, changes his ..according to Serb sources.. (note: that is not just according to sources "written by ethnic Serbs", as seen on the articles talk page, that is according to "sources written by ethnic Englishmen, Irish, Americans, Poles, Turks, Armenians, Montenegrins, Greeks, etc. as well"). Now this is the thing that shocked all of us: he changed it to ..According to Serb myth or fairy tale.. and/or and that there's no proof for claims of his noble origin and appoint them to later Serb myth. He then reverts again to his version (previously reverted by yet another administrator) and writes "..no way he was serbian, being serbian means that you are from serbia and he was from bosnia.." (totally false, 100% known by him as a mad-up thing). here he repeated the thing, returning the ol' uncivil how he wow, even put what the Serbs say (which according to him is of course, Serb mythology and totally false, because it was written by ethnic Serbs).

After he retreated from the War, he edited again, putting numerous "sources needed" (at every single place where it could connect him to anything Serbian, or even less just Orthodox Christian), although this is the very same argument that's bean cleared at the talk page for precisely 7 times in huge discussions by now. He persists on it, and again decides to return his demands that "Bosniak" be returned, but agrees to leave "Serb" together with it in the article (Plan C). I think that he still didn't like that it says "Serb", so he all of a sudden returned to Plan B (just "Bosnian") and reverted to it here. After constantly ignoring the talk page and abandoning all discussions, he reverted again only recently, after a long time.

And not for the talk page (so huge that it deserves a special status).


 * After I tried to present him Wikipedia's policy WP:NPOV and wrote: "..Emir Arven added according to Serb authers and On the other hand Bosniak historians consider that above thesis is never proven. They think it is another Serb myth mixed with nationalism and anachronism. Both of these statements brake wikipedia's WP:NPOV policy. Especially is interesting another Serb myth which brakes wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy to the highest point. It presents superiority of Bosniak historians to the inferior Serbian sources (by the way - sources that state his Serbdom are not even Serbian; see below..", Emir responded with "..That is your POV. Serb myths are well known for all people in the Balkans. Even for Serb hard-core nationalists like Kilibarda.--Emir Arven 14:25, 18 February 2006 (UTC).." (evidently aiming that Neutral Point of View and Wikipedia's policy is just my personal Point of View). Then he commits a personal attack after I dispute his single source (sources against Emir's argument are 100 more numerous, as can be seen at the talk page), Emir attacks me with "..Who says? You? The one always ready for making things up? --Emir Arven 14:25, 18 February 2006 (UTC).."


 * After I presented to Emir a Bosnian source (hoping that he'll acknowledge things written by ethnic Bosniaks) which also claims that Mahmut/Bajica was a Serb convert, Emir responded with "..irrelevant.." and further down explain my behavior through this comment: This Vojislav Šešelj radical and nationalistic behaviour becomes really pathetic. In Serb political tradition, propaganda and lies are very common mean for achiving political goals according to Novak Kilibarda, former Serb nationalist.--Emir Arven 14:10, 18 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Then he wrote: "..Here is a quote in Bosnian which explains how Serb sources and other indirect sources have many contrapositions. On the other hand Turkish sources dont support Serb thesis that Makarije was his brother. They talk about his two brothers, and any of them was not Makarije.."


 * Note that Turkish historians do support this "Serb myth", as has been noted to Emir even before he posted this post. This further down sentence, denying all the hundreds of sources and links which I gave him, sounds like this: As I said Serb historians as well as Serb politicians were capable of making things up. It is not strange. We have all heard/seen in Milosevic trial where number of Serb experts came to explain Serb history and "Serb historical rights". Serb mythology is very important part of it. It is not "Bosnika thesis", it is Serb thesis. Novak Kilibarda, one of Serb nationalists/ideologist talked about it many many times. Wow, six "Serb [negative thing]" in just a couple of sentences. It is to my opinion that this speaks a lot about my claim that this user is obsessed with hatred towards the ethnic group in question.


 * Interestingly further, Emir Arven quotes a Turkish version of a book written by a Serbian historian (this one). "Bosnian" in Turkish is translated to "Bosniak". Very interestingly enough, this book (the very source presented by Emir Arven) claims that Mehmed-pasa Sokolovic was a Serbian patriot'''. After I mention this, Emir becomes quit regarding this source.


 * After I posed numerous new sources of encyclopedic renown (although including a Serbian school textbook), Emir Arven wrote: "..Other sources that you provided are nationalistic and radical sources. And you mentioned Serbian government source? Hello? The government that still protects war criminals? Ten years after the war. Are you serious?.." He argumented that all sources, no matter who/when/why wrote them, are simply blinded by Serbian nationalism simply because they support the "Serb mythology". (Then below, even though I gave him Turkish sources, he repeated "..And yes, Turkish historians do not support Serb myth.."


 * There is a source (far before the 1990s, Emir Arven said that no source from the 1990s written by ethnic Serbs should not be used because that was the time when Serbs committed Bosnian genocide on Bosniaks in BH) from 1906 written by a Serbian historian in full detail, quoting numerous Venetian, Turkish, German, Greek and other sources. This is how Emir Arven responded to it, again attaching connotations to war crimes from the Bosnian war (without reading the source in detail):
 * "The source that was included in the article, and that was provied by HolyRomanEmperor "Famous Serb Muslims" [10] by Milenko Vukičević is not even myth. It is more a fairy tale, written in 1906. I have just read nonsenses in that "book". It claimes that Bosniaks are Serbs and that Husein Gradaščević was a Serb. (Interestingly the same thing did HolyRomanEmepror). This source was written during Serb nationalistic sentiment. It is based on anachronism, nationalism and fairy tales. The same claimes has Serb Radical Rarty which president Vojislav Šešelj is war criminal, now in ICTY. (He also claimes that Bosniaks and Croats are Serb Muslims, and Serb Catholics.) Juts the title of the book is a joke. Now it is obvious that Rastko Center is place for nationalistic papers based on myths. So, HolyRomanEmperor, your articles should be reviewed because your main source is nationalistic crap.--Emir Arven 20:03, 24 February 2006 (UTC)"


 * Subsequently a user from Turkey that AFAIK claimed that "..Serbs lack neutrality and a sense of reality.." by the user-name of Adkagansu, wrote that Mehmed indeed was a Serb. Emir Arven denied that & said: "..Mehmed pasha identified himself with Bosnia not Serbia. His Christian origin was used by Serb historians to present him as a Serb which was anachronism. Some other sources took that fact interpreted by Serbs, but there is not one serious research that will support this thesis. [totally false and an intentionally bad faith edit, as can be seen if anyone sees the talk page of the article] On the other hand there can be million links (tourist agency sites or nationalistic fairy tales), but based on what researches? Mustafa Imamovic, Yale professor gave very good interpretation not just in a section which was quoted in the Famous Bosniak site. His book is based on his long research and respectable professor career.--Emir Arven 19:44, 4 March 2006 (UTC).."

Oj, svijetla majska zoro
This song is an old folk song, that is the present national anthem of Montenegro.

The song originally glorifies the fight of the Serbs against the Turks. Emir Arven removed the original quotes, and replaced them by a blatant unsupported section, full of hatred towards Serbs (especially because the section falls down under trolling). It goes as following: "After the de facto annexation of Montenegro by its war-time ally Serbia at the end of World War I, lyrics have been altered many times in order to make the case of an alleged Serbian heritage of Montenegrins. Nowdays discredited as forgeries, these attempts are widely regarded by both eminent historians and the general public to be politicaly motivated and subservient to a Serbian nationalist agenda and a strategy to covertly assimilate fiercly independent Montenegrins. Various forms of these versions of the text can be found in Serbian press reports and propaganda material, and on the world wide web as well, but they seem to have lost their backing after the collapse of the nationalist regime of Slobodan Milosevic and are now supported by nationalist individuals, rather than a political entity or regime." I repeat that this is solely written as a hate speech towards Serbs (100% Original research).

The Montenegrins have always spoken and most speak now, the Serbian language. However, Emir replaced the language with "Montenegrin language" (a recent thing promoted by a minority of Montenegrin & Croatian linguists). It is to my belief that this edit was made solely & exclusively because it wrote "Serbian". He also replaced the "..The anthem is criticised on the base that its lyrics are the one made by Sekula Drljevic, Montenegrin collaborator with Nazis during WWII." with "..The anthem is criticised on the base that its lyrics are the one made by Sekula Drljevic, a controversial Montenegrin because of his role during WWII, executed by Serbian Communists by the end of that war.." which is another fabrication written solely on the plan to discredit Serbs. If anyone would take a look at Sekule's article, he would discover that the fascist was assassinated by his own soldiers, Montenegrin Chetniks. And lastly, in the edit summary of this POV edit, he wrote: "Serb vandalism! Denying of Montenegrin language! I tried to improve the article."

After this trollish edit of his was reverted, he reverted it back, giving a non-sense explanation in the Edit summary, and then again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again (in the edit summaries he made references to several neo-fascists like Jevrem Brković, but it is irrelevant to note because they AFAIK do not support those edits of his, as has been proven).

Njegoš
Peter II Petrovic-Njegos is the greatest writer of the Serbian language ever. He's a Montenegrin. He made this edit, removing all mentions of Serbs. In the edit summary he wrote: "rv anachronism and serb vandalism! It is just cyrillic not serbian cyrillic; Njegos was a Montenegrin poet, not a Serb poet" He then reverted to his (which is obvious 100% trolling based on an ethnic hatred) version and then again and gain and again and again

At the talk page of the article Emir Arven's pushing can also be noticed. Emir Arven did not even read any of Peter's works. So, I presented to him the only online version of his greatest work and the greatest Serbian Epic ever written: the Mountain Wreath. Note: Everyone in former Yugoslavia read/reads this. Look how Emir replied: "..The source that you give is completely POV and not acceptable. It is the Serb mythological site."

Some other uncivil points
Over at User_talk:Domitius/Archive1 I discussed history revisionism subject with Domitius; Emir Arven suddenly appeared and wrote: "..But we are small nation, so bigger are alwayes trying to impose their will as Serbs and Croats always did during history. The last genocide commited by Serbs is just an example of hatred which can be tracked to the Middle Ages. That is my opinion. Emir Arven 17:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)" This can be connected to Emir Arven's edits over at Stephen II of Bosnia, where he tried to present that Serbs constantly hate Bosniaks for almost a thousand years, and whenever I gave occasions of Bosnians & Serbs getting along during the Medieval times, Emir Arven would just constantly repeat how Serbs all the time hate Bosniaks and that bad-faith ethnocentrism of Serbs towards Bosniaks dates back to the very Middle Ages (sic!).

Mood
Bairam came, and as usual, I always send messages to congratulate Bairam to all followers of Islam (that) I know (Emir Arven appears to be a Muslim). See what I wrote here and then his following reply; I wrote: "Bairam is an excellent opportunity to make peace. Isn't it? :-) --HolyRomanEmperor 18:18, 16 January 2006 (UTC)" And this is Emir Arven's response: "When you mention Bairam, old memories come to me, becaue on Bairam, Serb army surrounded Sarajevo and started to kill people. You can see there some pictures and stories The siege of Sarajevo. Bairam is a good muslim holiday, but if you want to learn smth from it, than you should behave, not just destroy as Serb army did with my city. --Emir Arven 19:02, 16 January 2006 (UTC)"


 * I don't think comments are necessary here. The response alone made me extremely sad.

He then below wrote: ''Anachronism is a form of denial. You are the one that use anachronism when writting the articles, based mostly on Serb sources, which are full of mythology. --Emir Arven 16:32, 18 January 2006 (UTC)''

Just down to below he made a comment which is a proof of what I've been saying, how he thinks, claims and spreads (or better, propagates) that Serbs hate Bosniaks since the middle ages: "They never shared full territorial unity except in Kingdom of Yugoslavia. Pinceses didnt rule Bosnia, just males. [indicating that he doesn't know history by the way, I'll be damned if Queen Jelena Gruba is of male sex] Bosnian rulers and their knights had many fights with Serbs. It is well known that Bosnian rulers supported Bosnian Church which was the reason that Serbian rulers used to send complaints to Pope asking him to attack Bosnia. Bosnian rulers used to marry princesses from other countries in Europe not just from Serbia. Serbs naver liked Bosnians because of their religion, not then, not now.--Emir Arven 21:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)"

He then accused me of supporting the controversial Serbophobia article:"Because your sources are irrelevant. On the second hand, you have already supported another Serb myth called Serbophobia as I can remeber. I have not seen any serious source or research about Mehmed Pasha. --Emir Arven 19:25, 24 February 2006 (UTC)" Controversial as it may be, Serbophobia is not a myth, it is Anti-Serbian sentiment, which appears to be present in Emir's case. However, I did not support the drat of that article - once I informed Emir that I voted neutral on its AfD (not be seen bad in the eyes of anyone), Emir Arven wrote this:"Your neutral vote was obvious. If you really want true, you should show that.--Emir Arven 16:03, 25 February 2006 (UTC)" He actually blamed me for that.

To the below, a neutral administrator warned him about the WP:NPOV policy. This was Emir's reply to him: "..you are not even close to be neutral.--Emir Arven 14:47, 26 February 2006 (UTC).." and "What Serbs? For instance Serb Radical Party, whose president is a war criminal now in ICTY, views all Bosniaks and Croats as Serbs (Serb Muslims and Serb Croats). A million people in Serbia voted for that party. They based their war policy of aggression on Bosnia and Croatia, on that thesis, because they consider Bosnia and Croatia as Serb lands. Not all referneces should be put in the article, because many of them are crap and it is very dangerous to create another Serb myth. We dont need another Milosevis and Mladic in the Balkans.--Emir Arven 17:08, 26 February 2006 (UTC)" Highly uncivil, and taking to granted the other things this user said, is fueled by stereotype.

Further below, he wrote: "I am not a sick-minded man [referring to me] to suck up everyone's ass [..] Your problem is that your knowledge is thin so you resort to lying"

After User:DragonflySixtyseven (rightfully) blocked him for revert-warring, personal attacks & incivility, Emir Arven appealed against him, even sent complaints to other administrators (uncivil).

Conclusion
This is only a fringe (i.e. one 100th bit) of the aggressive and abusive behavior that User:Emir Arven exposed, and in the end, a very bad ethnic hatred towards Serbs and Croats could be seen in his words if carefully examined. There can be seen a huge pattern of such actions, from the day when he came to present-day. If anyone needs more info (as this is only a trickle of Emir Arven's actions), one only needs to see through his contributions, or more precisely ask me for links, as I have recorded in detail many of his nationalist outbursts. --PaxEquilibrium 22:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC)