User talk:Rave92/Archive 2

Belgrade - Bar Motorway
I have restored the Cyrillic, but will stop at mentioning that Montenegro has no motorway. I know you are from Montenegro and that your country does not deal with Cyrillic very much but there are two things to be taken into consideration. Firstly, Serbia forms one part of this article and its language is Serbian; officially Cyrillic. Secondly, at present, Montenegro continues to call its language Serbian across a wide section of everyday life, and a potential Montenegrin alphabet to accompany a language will still have Cyrillic in some shape, even if in second place. I suggest that if you wish to remove Cyrillic again, please go to a number of Serbia related articles first - remove it there - and see if it will be accepted. Thank you. Evlekis (talk) 19:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I know, both of languages have Cyrillic script, but just didn't saw what's so important of having those two scripts for motorway? But don't worry, I won't change it. Best regards. Rave92 (talk) 19:31, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, in the meantime I've made another mistake... by trying to bring back the Cyrillic name of the anthem on Montenegrins, I took out something else you did which was constructive. I apologise, I'll try to restore it as best as I can. Evlekis (talk) 19:38, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

It's ok but what's the point of writing anthem also in Cyrillic? People can see the anthem in Cyrillic when they click the link. For e.g. take BiH. Their anthem is only written in Latin on the country profile, even though Cyrillic is also used in BiH. It make it look like Montenegro only uses Cyrillic script like Russia or Bulgaria, even though it is a lot less used. Is it OK to remove it? I added Cyrillic to the name in "Montenegrin" as you can see. Rave92 (talk) 19:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Symbols
Hi, as you will probably see, I've been trying to get rid of all dispute notes in the Montenegro article, the last obstacle is in the section http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montenegro#Symbols. Can you do some research and sort it out? I'm afraid I can't really do much about it, since I don't know anything about Montenegrin holidays and why "the Congress of Berlin recognised Montenegro as the 27th independent state in the world". Question is: how can you establish which country was the 27th in the world? Also, being about a national holiday, should the passage not be included in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montenegro#Montenegrin_holidays ? Brutaldeluxe (talk) 00:53, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Done, I hope now it is OK. Also I don't get the second question "should the passage not be included in"? It is included, it is 13 of July, or in article mentioned as "Statehood Day", or you meant something else? Rave92 (talk) 10:59, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks Rave92, and sorry, I meant included among the Montenegrin holidays, but I guess it's fine in the Symbols section. OK, so now the article has no notes whatsoever, it must be the only Balkans country to have a clean, undisputed, article.Brutaldeluxe (talk) 13:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem, also thanks to you too for cleaning article of citation notes :).

P.S.: How do you put the British flag in background of Wikipedia's logo? Rave92 (talk) 14:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The British flag in the background of Wikipedia's logo came when I added this template to my user page:


 * It's quite easy to adapt to any country you want, just needs a bit of experimenting.Brutaldeluxe (talk) 15:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, ok thanks. Rave92 (talk) 15:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Visa free list Montenegro
Please do not just revert edits ! I have checked all changes against reliable soures such as timatic and relevant countries' embassies' websites. If you think that specific entries are wrong, please post here or on my or the page's talk page first. 19:08, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * One note on Israel. I have taken that off of the list because inspite of the fact that the Israeli foreign ministry database showing visa-free status, the embassy in Belgrade makes no mention of a visa-free status for Montenegrins and timatic shows up "visa required" status. So unless further sources turn up, I'm assuming that the "yes" designation in the MFA database is simply a fault. Or do you have other sources (news articles etc) showing that visa requirements were recently abolished ? Passportguy (talk) 19:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I will revert edits because they are not true.

Israel: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Sherut/IsraeliAbroad/Continents/Europe/Montenegro/

All other I already stated you can find on our government web sites. Even though embassie is in Belgrade, it doesn't mean it is the same visa requirements for us. Make a map with the information from our goverment, not Serbian. Rave92 (talk) 21:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The Israeli embassy in Belgrade is accredited to both Serbia and Montenegro. It is not a Serbian source.
 * Also : Please stop edit-waring, or you will be banned again ! The image you keep reverting condradicts even the previous version of the passport page - which - if you cared to actually look at peoples contributions instead of just hitting revert - you might actually notice.
 * And last but not least : Pages by national MFA that list immigration requirements for that countries' citizens for the entire world are never reliable source. Since these ministries are not the people who actually make the regulations these lists are very often extremly outdated and/or do not have the correct detailed information. But again : If you want to add any particular country you think it wrongly excluded, please state so on one of the talk pages so that we may disucss that particular case. I and other editors certainly do not have a problem with constructive edits or suggestions - but just engaging in senseless reverts will lead to nothing. Passportguy (talk) 21:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

1. I was never banned
 * See above on your own talk page

2. I won't stop on something which is not true. Embassy is in Serbia, but ambassador which represents Israel in Serbia also covers Montenegro on non-residential basic. Not sure how much you are informed on question of diplomacy, but it is accredited there doesn't mean country shares the same political relationship for Montenegro as Serbia. They don't require visa for Montenegrin citizens. SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO are independent countries, and if they cover Montenegro from embassy in Serbia, that doesn't mean it's the same (I think I mentioned this like 3 times now).
 * I worked for an embassy thank you. And you don't seem to understand the difference betwen accreditation and residence. A non-resident ambassador is every bit as much an ambassador as a resident one - the only difference is the amount of time he spends in a particular country.

Compare Serbian http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Sherut/IsraeliAbroad/Continents/Europe/Serbia http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Sherut/IsraeliAbroad/Continents/Europe/Montenegro Also I can't think is the information outdated (how it can be outdated, it's not like we had visa-free before). Also those people are not who make the decision? It's the government web site, what more reliable you can want? We are putting Israel according to their info, if it's not true, it won't be the fault of Wikipedia editors, but their government.
 * If you want to put up Israel, feel free to do for now. However I am still not convinced that this is true, for the reasons stated above.

Also you remove Andorra which says we can travel without Visa (I think Serbia too).
 * Will do.

We can travel to Russia for 1 month without Visa and voucher, as well as Turkey and Belarus. Also on your map, you added Russia like we get Visa on arrive (light blue) and remove some countries like Israel, even though by formal web site we can travel without it. Rave92 (talk) 23:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Timatic shows Russia travel only allowed with a voucher, which would be in line with the status Serbia-Montenegro had before the independance of Monetengro. Do you have any source that states that travel is now completly visa free ?
 * Btw : appart from Israel & Russia the other changes on the new map are :
 * Argentina : This official source states that Montenegro is not visa-free
 * I found a better source that does state Argentina is visa visa, so I put it back on the list. Passportguy (talk) 13:06, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Burkina Faso : Visa-on-arrival facilities were recently abolished for all nationalites
 * Bangladesh : All nationals currently qualify for a VOA
 * China : Old map showed this a a visa-free destination
 * Georgia: According to a visa is required
 * Mongolia: IATA gives no indication that this is a visa-free with voucher destination.
 * Oman : Accoring to the IATA, Montenegrin do not qualify for the VOA
 * Qatar : Montenegrins do not qualify for the visa on arrival
 * Switzerland : Diplomats may now travel here visa-free after accession to Schengen - assuming the article is correct in stating that this is true for the "Schengen States"
 * North Korea: requires a visa by all - no visa free travel.
 * I am going to restore the map with Israel on it as visa-free for now. But we realy need more than a database output as source for this one in the long term, especially since the emabssy website makes no mention of visa-free travel and IATA says it is not visa-free. If this is a recent change, surely there must be newspaper articles online ? Passportguy (talk) 23:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

1. I was never banned, I think I know that best.

2. You worked as WHO in embassy? And for what country?

Anyway let's get back. I didn't saw it showed China as visa free as it sure isn't (I mean it sure isn't visa-free, probably mistake, I will fix it).

Mongolia : Passport required. Passport and/or passport replacing documents must be valid on arrival. Visa required.

Visa Issuance: On arrival: if required, to visitors arriving from countries where there is no diplomatic representation of Mongolia.

Andorra

Montenegrin citizens may travel to this country with a valid passport without a visa.

http://www.mip.gov.me/en/index.php/Visas-for-Montenegrin-Citizens/andorra.html

Also: Passport required. Passport and/or passport replacing documents must be valid on arrival. Passport Exemptions:

Holders of any passport replacing document accepted by France or Spain, which must be transited to reach Andorra.

http://www.timaticweb.com/cgi-bin/tim_website_client.cgi?SpecData=1&VISA=1&HEALTH=1&NA=ME&AR=00&DE=AD&EM=ME&TR=00&VT=00&PASSTYPES=PASS&user=STAR&subuser=STAR

So even though if you want to enter from France you need Schengen visa, but the point is that you need that visa to enter in France, not Andorra, so I am putting Andorra back. Rave92 (talk) 15:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Reply
I'm putting this in a new section, as to not interfere with your edits above, which need a bit of cleaning up.
 * Mongolia : Visas are available on arrival according to the IATA, but several Mongolian embassy websites say that this option is only for "exceptional circumstances". So this needs further reseach. But I have no objection of you add Mongolia as visa-on-arrival for now.
 * Andorra : Andorra is a special case. It is the only country in the world (at leasdt that I know of) that does not have it's own visa regulation but does require the passports of all people that enter to be valid for entry into another country, in this case the Schengen Area. Any person entering Andorra must have a valid (double-entry) Schengen visa or he will not be allowed to enter Andorra. You cannot enter Andorra with only a used single entry Schengen visa. Thus Andorra is not visa free for Montenegrins, because a Schengen visa is needed for entry. Passportguy (talk) 16:02, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I know what you mean, but still, everyone put Andorra as visa-free, and even though some of those countries require Schengen visa. So let's put it there, so if anyone reads it, he/she knows that they must pass Schengen to enter it, so it doesn't change it. Also Montenegro will get visa-free regime with Schengen countries in beginning of 2010. So Andorra just requires normal passport, and (I think) it's not part of Schengen countries so we can't really count it as such. Rave92 (talk) 16:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * What you need to enter Andorra is a valid (re-)entry permission for the Schengen countries. That can be a passport from a country that does not require a Schengen visa, a reisidence permit for an EU country or a double/multple entry Schengen visa.
 * If a Montenegrin wants to travel to Andorra, he/she need to apply for a double-entry Schengen visa. If they were to turn up at the Andorran border without such a double-entry visa or without a visa at all, they'd be turned back. That is what differenciates it from visa-free countries, e.g. Croatia, where no visa is needed, neither from a Croatian embassy or any other country. The only thing needed for entry here is a passport. Passportguy (talk) 16:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

So then you should remove it from Serbian too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_passport

Rave92 (talk) 16:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Passportguy (talk) 16:30, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Are you from Switzerland? Rave92 (talk) 19:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No. Why ? Passportguy (talk) 19:06, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Meh just asking. Rave92 (talk) 19:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

New map
The new map you uploaded still containes a number of mistakes :


 * North Korea (visa is requied)
 * Burkina Faso (visa is required)
 * Russia : you need to provide a source saying that no visa is required even if travelling with a voucher
 * Azerbaijan : IATA says that visa is required (available on arrival), and I have yet to see a source that says otherwise
 * Oman : Visa on arrival not available to Montenegrin citizens.

All of these mistakes need to be corrected asap ! Passportguy (talk) 16:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hm... as for Russia: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20081121/118442463.html http://www.russia-ic.com/news/show/7127/

Others you can feel free to edit it, just don't edit Russia. Rave92 (talk) 16:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok. Eventually we'll need official confirmation of this, but for now these sources are okay. Passportguy (talk) 16:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I think they don't have which countries can visit without visa on their web sites (Ministry of Foreign Affairs). Rave92 (talk) 16:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Lion
I translated this : The figure of a lion in Orthodox iconography symbolizes Saint Marco and is considered to represent the paradigm of resurrection and the kingdom of Christ or a symbol of vigilance under the parable of Solomon.

I belive that it is better in some ways than just "The lion passant in the centre is a sign of episcopal authority and represents the Biblical theme of the Resurrection, or Christ Ruler of All (Christos Pantokrator, the Lion of Judah)." what is currently written in the article Coat of arms of Montenegro.

I would like your opinion on how to merge the two sentences to make it more descriptive and clear.

Imbris (talk) 01:26, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Not sure, both version seem fine to me. Rave92 (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Montenegrin
Hi Rave, as you're probably aware, Montenegrin is not yet recognized as an independent language by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). The ISO is the main linguistic reference on Wikipedia for determining "what's what", as it were. Please understand that I have absolutely nothing against Montenegrin independence or that of the Montenegrin language, and that I'm not reverting you out of some "anti-Montenegrin" POV. Its just the standard approach with language references. Regards -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 17:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * There is not ISO because our government didn't took this serious, and because there is argument between two standards. It should be done until the beginning of next school year. Also we can say that Serbo-Croatian shouldn't be used there as it isn't used anymore in the countries that it was official. And none one on Wikipedia had anything against "Montenegrin" on this or any other article until you removed it (and I am talking about neutral Wikipedians which are not from Balkans). I know that you are probably not against Montenegro, but you are removing something which none one removed. Why not just leave it there, it's not like article is loosing if it has Montenegrin on article. Rave92 (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I understand. However, its just how things are done on Wiki. Its all about the sources. When Montenegrin gets standardized, hopefully soon, I'll do my best to get it back in. (Serbo-Croatian is an ISO-recognized macrolanguage, ISO 639-1 designation is sh) -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 12:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Well I guess, but Wiki Admins would probably fight against using of Montenegrin language if it would be against some Wiki rules. But ok, as long it's only "Hej Sloveni" article, it's fine with me to keep like this until Montenegrin doesn't get ISO, but if it's only on "Hej Sloveni". I am not sure when we will get a standard, but it should be soon, hopefully this summer.

Rave92 (talk) 12:58, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Dear coleague, do you really belive that MR. DIREKTOR can overthrow the Montenegrin language from this wikipedia. For God's sakes this wikipedia has an article about the language and it is used throught the project with no substantive objection.
 * I would like to point out to Montenegrin Mountain Hound.
 * Imbris (talk) 01:36, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Not really. I agree with your opinion but not sure if I can do anything against it. They won't delete other articles with Montenegrin language but just on "Hej Sloveni", but still, I don't like how they call my language imaginary at first, but then they say it's because it doesn't have a ISO yet. Rave92 (talk) 09:47, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok. I see the entire matteria about Hey, Slavs will "probably" go to a proper Mediation Cabal. The new mediatior will contact you if he/she choose. Here is an interesting fact:460 citizens of Croatia declared in 2001 as their native language the Montenegrin language.
 * Their Serbo-Croatian do not have any ISO code which describes it as a "language", sh (and also scc, scr) are history. The only code that language posseses now is hbs which defines it as a macro language. Cheers.
 * Imbris (talk) 01:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Not to forget, I have read somewhere that the 1974 Constitution of the SR Montenegro did not contain the legal provision about the name of official language. I belive that in any library in Montenegro there could be found a copy of that Constitution to chech is this true. It would help the Montenegrin language (the article) a great deal to present that content. As I have read, it is written that SR Montenegro had an official language, but did not decide its name. -- Imbris (talk) 01:36, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. In Montenegro, the name of language was always confusing. Not sure if I can find the copy of the constitution. Rave92 (talk) 09:24, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Please try, it would be great to get a confirmation on that info. The Constitution of the SR Montenegro was published in the Official Gazette of the SR Montenegro in the year 1974 (25. II 1974.), all of the issues for that year are bounded in a singular book that can be found in libraries, courts, public administration offices and elsewhere. I will try to find it myself but it would be easier for you to find it. Naturally if you are interested in that piece of info.


 * Also if you are interested you can add at the talk pages you find are of interest to the WikiProject Montenegro, all info is here WikiProject Montenegro/Assessment.


 * Imbris (talk) 17:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring / Your signature
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.

Also, please remove the image from your signature per our signature guidelines. Regards  So Why  17:48, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Montenegrin/Yugoslavian mountain hound
As I explained, the average reader will have a much easier time connecting Yugoslavia to an Eastern European accent than Montenegro. Moreover, some would not even recognize "Montenegrin" as "from Montenegro" but might rather think of it as a separate word. Our goal is to ease on the reader as much as possible. 87.69.130.159 (talk) 11:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * There isn't average reader, it's the name of dog breed. Yugoslavia wasn't in Eastern Europe either. If a reader is a person who doesn't know a geography, it won't affect it anyway, as none of those two were or ARE in Eastern Europe. Rave92 (talk) 17:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, it's a puppet. He also claimed that he's part toy rottweiler and part mountain hound. "Yugoslavian" serves to explain the accent, it's as simple as that. The readers are the reason Wikipedia exists! By the way, "Eastern European accent" means the same as "Slavic accent" in this context. 87.69.130.159 (talk) 17:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I would also suggest Rave92 not to insist on placing the name of the Montenegrin Mountain Hound in the context of making fun of it. -- Imbris (talk) 17:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Another thing: until 1997, the name of the breed was "Yugoslavian Mountain Hound." Since Triumph's early appearances were in 1997, this is a correct definition. Besides, I am urging you to stop edit warring over this, as you seem completely oblivious to reason. 87.69.130.159 (talk) 17:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, until 1991/1992 Poland was in Soviet Union, should we call Soviet things which come from Poland before 1992 :/. Rave92 (talk) 17:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I would kindly advise you to revise your knowledge in history. Poland was never a Soviet republic. Besides, the references to this breed were made in 1997, when Yugoslavia was still a country – therefore, it would be a historical fallacy to identify a country that did not independently exist at the time of the statement. 87.69.130.159 (talk) 18:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * @Rave92: Did you see the title of the article in question – its – Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog‎. I believe that it is contraproductive to put the Montenegrin Mountain Hound in that sort of an article. I would like to hear your opinion on that issue. There is more to be done on that article, look here for an example. -- Imbris (talk) 19:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * @Rave92: I will support your opinion if you explain it, maybe you think that all publicity is good. I do not know, but if you still believe into using the name of the Montenegrin Mountain Hound in the article in question I will support that. -- Imbris (talk) 21:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I think you are right xD. Not sure if we should support it. What do you think? Rave92 (talk) 09:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The IP-user proposed this: "Triumph was identified in early appearances as a Yugoslavian Mountain Hound (a dog breed which is now known as Montenegrin Mountain Hound)..."


 * I'm not sure if the formulation is good, but as you know, there is no bad publicity.
 * Imbris (talk) 00:58, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Yea, so what do you suggest? The formulation: ">Triumph was identified in early appearances as a Yugoslavian Mountain Hound (a dog breed which is now known as Montenegrin Mountain Hound)" or...? Rave92 (talk) 18:56, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I leave this up to your capable hands :) – But now, no kidding, can you find a picture of the Montenegrin Mountain Hound – we could sure use it in the article on the breed. -- Imbris (talk) 00:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Here you go: – I trust one of you to get the license issue straight, since I don't have time right now. 87.69.130.159 (talk) 12:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the picture but not sure how to add it on Wiki, under which copyright license :/. Do you know Imbris? "87.69.130.159" Can you find a real picture of the Montenegrin Mountain Hound? Rave92 (talk) 18:11, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, I found a picture: http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/3996/img3000zfx.jpg

From this forum: http://www.balkankinology.net/pricaonica/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=12485

But we need permission from the author of the picture. Rave92 (talk) 19:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey
I think you might be interested in this: http://montenegro.wikkii.com. Looks like Crnogorska Enciklopedija has been unofficially reincarnated. --Prevalis (talk) 16:11, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks but it also looks like all articles were deleted -_-. Rave92 (talk) 15:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Corrections at User:Ev
Hi Rave. Thank you for correcting & expanding my disclaimer :-) Best, Ev (talk) 20:56, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem mate :-D. Rave92 (talk) 21:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Featured article
Hey Ev, I was editing and working on Montenegrin article lately to candidate it for featured article. I will add some more pictures in politics and maybe do some edits and thinking of making it candidate for featured article. Do you think it has a chance? See it here. Best regards! Rave92(talk) 20:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Rave. I have only glimpsed through the article, and in any case I'm afraid that I don't know enough about the country to be able to judge the neutrality and comprehensiveness of various sections. However, there's one key criterion whose unfulfillment immediately becomes apparent: 1(c) well-researched. The sources used as references are mostly web-sites, and indicates the lack of "a thorough and representative survey of relevant literature on the topic" (my emphasis). In other words, a lack of books by subject experts: nothing in the article indicates that it reflects modern scholarship on Montenegrin topics.


 * For comparison, check those articles on countries that currently have featured status: Australia, Bangladesh, Belarus, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, Germany, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Peru and Turkey. See the kind of references used in those entries. – See also the kind of questions and constructive criticism carried out at Featured article candidates.


 * Having said that, keep up the good work. God knows Wikipedia needs more Montenegrins adding their unique perspective to our articles & discussions. :-) Best, Ev (talk) 18:38, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes it needs more Montnenegrins, not other neighbor nations :), Rave92 (talk) 03:55, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

'dwe talk pl?
skyp: sven0921--史凡 (talk) 19:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Montenegro anthem
Hi Rave. I thought I should explain this to you as we did talk two months ago about using Cyrillic in Montenegrin articles. I presume you may be against it from the nature of your edits. I restored the Cyrillic on the anthem name but this time, I did it in such a way that it is clear that this is simply the Cyrillic spelling of it. I did so by adding Montenegrin Cyrillic on the display. For precisely the same reason that a Cyrillic form exists on the article, one needs to be on any page in which it is mentioned because we are presenting text in another language which happens to have another alphabet. This is something you will notice with the articles of Greece and Republic of Macedonia as well as others; the anthem name must appear in the Romanised form of every language; likewise, where it is mentioned, transliterations appear to be a requirement back to original scripts. I see there has been some controversy surrounding the language of Montengro, and Montenegrin now seems to be the popular choice. Not that I disagree, I know that before an actual Montenegrin language takes shape across the country, it will encounter many changes from its current Serbian in Ijekavian format into something based on the true dialects of the region. I also realise that this does not need to happen for the nation to call the language Montenegrin. In addition, I am aware that in a Montenegrin literary system - as opposed to Serbian - the Roman alphabet will take precedence over Cyrillic. That too is the choice of the scholars and of the nation. But it is unlikely that Cyrillic will vanish entirely. As such, the script needs to be displayed for texts and relevant pieces of information originating from Montenegrin. Obviously, one doesn't need to use Cyrillic everywhere, such as upon mentioning Željko Šturanović (Жељко Штурановић). That would be zealous, but then Greek doesn't do this either when mentioning politicians and celebrities in any old article. You see, that is how I deduce what should and what should not be displayed! The other articles set the examples here. But where Arabic language text is used anywhere on a WP article, it will immediately be followed by the actual transliteration back into Arabic itself. I hope this makes sense to you and that it will not cause disputes. Feel free to respond on my talk page. Regards Evlekis (talk) 21:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I am not against Cyrillic, but just found it unnecessary to be used in country box section. When people click on the anthem link, they get anthem in Latin and Cyrillic script. As for Montenegrin, Montenegrin today got a standard and Roman and Cyrillic scripts are equal even in constitution. Children in school need to write both Latin and Cyrillic everyday until 4th grade and later they choose which one they want to write. So yeah, Cyrillic won't disappear in Montenegro, just Latin one is used more in media and by a government, doesn't change the fact you can always write in Cyrillic. And it's not like I undo your edit :/. Rave92 (talk) 23:17, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

thank you
i wanted to say thank you for fixing the template i created it looks so much better now thanx alot Cymruman (talk) 01:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)CYMRUMANCymruman (talk) 01:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)(02:31 UTC)

No problem mate :-). Rave92 (talk) 04:39, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Question
Zdravo Rave. I have recently heard about the Montenegrin alphabet and the letters ś and ź. I am curious, which words contain these sounds and should/will be written with these letters? Regards,  Balkan Fever  11:57, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Zdravo Balkanfever. Here are some words which contains those letters: Ś: śekira, śutra, śever, śeme, ośetiti, śediti, śekirati Ź: źevati, źenica, iźutra, iźede, źapiti, iźelica, koźetina

Although letter ś is more used, and words with letter ź are though as of archaism, while most of the words with ś are used in everyday speech. Best regards Rave92 (talk) 15:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

"Tend to use"
Jes', vala, ali ne može jezik da koristi azbuku/abecedu, već samo ljudi. Pošto je stara rečenica imala ljude, onda sam nju vratio. Možda bi bilo bolje "speakers of Montenegrin" ili tako nešto, ali mislim da ta rečenica nije ni toliko bitna. Ako crnogorski ima oba pisma, onda je sve jedno šta se više koristi. Mada je bitno da se spomenu oba pisma. Veoma malo imam vremena da razmišljam o tome, zato sam i revertovao prethodnu rečenicu.

Ima u tom članku još dosta stvari koje mi ... bodu oči. Recimo, pad totalizma. To bi trebalo potkrepiti citatima, potpuno je nejasno recimo Englezu kada čita, o kakvom se totalizmu radi, a stoji u uvodnom odeljku. Poz! :)--RockyMM (talk) 16:19, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Ma znam, vidjecemo da to popravimo. Pozdrav :-D! Rave92 (talk) 22:53, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Rave. I didn't spot your addition to my user page. Thanks a lot, and yes I don't mind your inclusion of Montenegrin. That page is at most a parody of most articles and their styles, it is tongue-in-cheek by appearance so nobody should take most of it seriously. As such, I usually let anyone make additions and add silly tags etc. There is only one thing, and I hope this won't upset you: if you examine that long list of languages, you'll see that Montenegrin was already there, I added it a long time ago! I don't mind it appearing twice because it adds to the comical effects. But if you see how I originally presented Montenegrin, that too is meant as a joke and I hope you don't get offended!! I played on a Montenegrin stereotype, and you know how we across the former Yugoslavia tell jokes about each other. It's one of the only pleasant things left to unite us socially if not nationally! Bosnians are often the butt of jokes as indeed are our combined Police staff. My family are from Macedonia and so we have jokes about every nation we know. In May, I was in Šibenik, Croatia, and there the taxi driver and I had found common ground for a pleasant discussion and this time it was Montenegrins we were having a joke about! These things must never be taken seriously, they are not nasty and they are not a sign of how anyone personally feels. Nobody has a reason to dislike the Montenegrin nation and I for one am very fond of the people on the whole. I love your tall girls, often taller than me and I am 1.84cm. So long as you realise (when you see it again) that my reference to Montenegrin is in good nature, I'm sure you won't bite back and say "that's not us you bonehead!". Cheers. Evlekis (talk) 16:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, yeah I saw that latter after I added. Haha don't worry, real Montenegrins never get offend by the jokes about laziness :). All people from ex-YU find that "simpaticno". So yeah, you can remove the one I added if you like. It's cool to know that in Croatia they know jokes about Montenegrins :). So, are you Macedonian or...? And BTW, I like your user page. Great parody. Best regards! Rave92 (talk) 00:37, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I didn't really think you'd be offended! And I won't remove what you did, I see it as a positive well-intended contribution. But I will amend the Bosnian entry, but this one might just step on the small finger of some Bosniak heavyweights. Just keep watching and you'll see what it says! They'll have to realise it is a joke. In the end of the day, people have to learn to live with these things. Lately I find it's the Albanians who are easily irritated. I designed a map of Europe to see how it would look if south went to top, but I acknowledged Kosovo on the footnotes to the left. I've heard nothing on this yet but I haven't drawn attention to it either. How do you think they'll like this ?


 * Jokes about Montenegrins can be told in Croatia, Bosnia, Slovenia, anywhere. Anyone over 25 years of age will have a memory of having lived in Yugoslavia and anyone younger will have had old jokes passed down to them from older generations. Take the UK: Ireland has been independent since 1922 (declared 1916) yet in England we still tell jokes about the Irish. The Irish nation in turn is very obliging, tends not to get offended. Actually, most Irish jokes originated from Ireland anyhow. They told them about themselves. Also, Montenegro may be small but - if you recall what we were talking about on the page about mentality - you have to travel a long way from Montenegro before things become significantly different. For example, at the end of June I made one of my favourite tours; I did four towns (Dubrovnik, Trebinje, Nikšić, Podgorica - then back to Dubrovnik to fly home via the same route). Three countries here, but it does not feel like you are in a different country at any time. The borders are largely symbolic and very relaxed (identity cards only required for nationals of bordering states, laughs and jokes with the border police/customs control, socialising between themselves from one border point to the next and the like). You won't get that on the Macedonian/Greek border; there the officials deliberately avoid eye contact with each other. As for Kosovo/Central Serbia crossings, the bitterness from Serb police towards EULEX/KFOR and any Kosovan official is unbelievable. When in Croatia, you travel northward up Dalmatia, and it is very Balkan-like: people loud, swearing casually, proud, crosses to reflect faith in their cars/buses - with icons or a flag of Croatia, cars parked with no order in towns, shouting (but not threatening), smoking middle-aged men with thick moustaches looking shamelessly at attractive girls' backsides/legs. But you lose this when you get to Pannonian Croatia, or Istria; there it is Central European in design. When I was in Zadar in May, one lad told me "I'd never give up the Dalmatian way of life for Zagreb/Slavonia/Istria etc" and I don't blame him. In Bosnia, which is renouned for being multi-ethnic, you get similar regionalisms. You find there that people accept each other for their ethnicity but instead form local associations to identify (ie. in Trebinje) as Herzegovinians as opposed to the northerners/the actual Bosnians. I heard many stories about the differences in people between the Balkan south, and the miserable north. Herzegovinians in turn consider Montenegrins/coastal Croats as "the same people" for having the same characteristics. So it is nothing political, ethnic, or official. Someone from Trebinje even joked with me on the border stretch at Ilino Brdo by pointing to some of the villages in the lower valleys which, unless you knew them, you cannot distinguish which are in Montenegro and which in BiH. He said, the best way to find out is listen to the speech of the locals, with Montenegrins it is "jebem oca" and with Bosnians it is "jebem mater"!

But the best thing about the Dinaric races is their enourmous frames (tall height). I walk through the crowded streets of a Montenegrin town at night when most of the folk are out, and right down the line you see pretruding heads of people who, when they get closer to me, I realise are well over 2 metres tall. Some men I saw cannot have been less than 2,20 - their bodies were so long that even people at 2 metres looked short. Even a lot of the girls. It seems that a girl in Montenegro/Herzegovina can be 1,90cm tall without being stared at like in the rest of Europe (only Holland comes a second close). Why? Because you don't only get one tall girl in the village/town, but the place is swarming with them; one here, two there; some all over the place!

Anyhow, I was born in Britain to parents from Macedonia who emmigrated. I was raised in a Yugoslav spirit so I never came to view Macedonians are a separate nation. Then came the 1990s and suddenly I realised new things. But for me, it was too late to teach the old dog new tricks! In addition, I reject the Macedonian purpose for its separate state and identity and I hate the way the country's government continually provokes Greece over such sensitive issues. They are their own worst enemy. I love the land - can never disown it - and the people/ethno-music-culture. But it is not necessary to have an independent country to practice these things. It would make no difference if Macedonia were attached to any of the four (or five with Kosovo) countries which surround it, or if Macedonia were in a union with Slovenia. So I simply consider myself Slavic and I feel affiliated to all Slavic nations, Macedonians included of course. Indeed, most of my family declare Macedonian, and as with Montenegro, Macedonia is multi-ethnic. We have Turks, Albanians and Roma; we also have autochtonous non-Macedonian Slavs such as Serbs, a few Bulgarians, Gorani and Pomaks. I don't think Yugoslavs registered in our 2002 census. We also have Bosniaks/other former Yugoslavs who relocated to Macedonia before the break-up. No rule to say "who is what!", I like the idea that I can go tomorrow to Montenegro and Croatia and feel as one of the people and be accepted by them. I realise that I need to accept the people and their ideologies but I am only too happy to do that. I accept all nations, so there you are. Which part of Montenegro are you from? Evlekis (talk) 08:51, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Woa, great post. First, map is good and yes, you will probably get reactions from Albanians for not having Kosovo :). Herzegovians are very alike to Montenegrins, and they share past so yeah. Yeah, Montenegrins are very tall, but didn't notice that the girls are very tall though. About Macedonia/Greek problem, well I don't know. Macedonians are to me very calm and good nation, and friendly toward Montenegrins. Yeah they went too far with acting like Ancient Greeks (I mean, the parliament need to be build in old Greek style, wtf?).  I am from Podgorica. As for Macedonian independence, well it is very undeveloped country, even though it is more closer to EU and NATO than Montenegro, economic situation can even compare: Montenegro - 14 000 $ per capita, Macedonia-10,039 (by the World Bank), and to see that they didn't had as much the problems we had in the past. There are a lot people from Macedonia that come to work in Montenegro at the construction (as well from Bosnia and Serbia). Rave92 (talk) 17:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

E-mail
Hi :D

Could you please enable your e-mail in your preferences, or send your e-mail to my mail. I have something to talk to you about, but not publicly (it has to do with Montenegrin language) :) Cheers --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 04:00, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I've sent you an E-mail. Best regards! Rave92 (talk) 04:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Zdravo!
Vidim, da si Crnogorac, ja sam Slovenac u Mađarskoj i prekomurski ili prekmurski jezik govorim. Ne znaš, da planirajo u Crnoj Gori crnogorsko wikipedijo i u internetu je negdje crnogorski riječnik (ili crnogorski-angleški, ili njemački, hrvatski). Me zanima slavenski jezici učim slavistiko. I sad ima ovaj članak: Prekmurian dialect, a voljem, da bo language. Prekmurski jezik ima standard književni jezik, User:Viator slovenicus pravio, da je to staro. Da, je stari književni jezik, a također novi standard. Sad jedan jezikoslovac i pisac Vilko Novak je pisao riječnik staroga prekmurskoga jezika i zasad još nijema riječnika novoga prekmurskoga jezika. Ja doma pripremim napomeno odavde: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Novine_i_Kalendar.JPG http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Marijin_list_(1920).JPG http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hodi_k_oltarskomi_svesti.JPG http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dusevni_list_(1933).JPG http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Molitvena_kniga_(1914).JPG jer tu je novi standard. Mogući, da jednom bude prekmurska wikipedija. Doncseczznánje 18:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Probacu da ti odgovorim koliko sam razumio. U CG planiraju crnogorsku wikipediju odavno, i bila je ne-oficijalno dugo vremena. Poslije je ukinuta (valjda je server bio pao, sta li), tako da dok se u potpunosti ne standardizuje crnogorski jezik, tako ce i biti. Sigurno ima rijecnik, ali nijesam siguran da li ga ima na internetu. Sto se tice tog jezika, zar Slovenci ne pricaju samo slovenacki jezik? Pozdrav Rave92 (talk) 19:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Slovenci nje samo slovenački govorijo. Prekmurje se je nalazio u Mađarskoj, 1920. godine doćio u Jugoslavijo. Jer nisu znali slovenački književni jezik i krajina je bila zaključna. Prekmurski svećenici su oblikovali književni jezik. Ovo je prekmurski Oče naš. Prekmurski jezik još nijema iso-ja, a od toga je jezik. U Italiji u Reziji također govorijo drugi slovenački jezi rezijanski (samo 1500 ljudi). Doncseczznánje 19:58, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Aha, da, vidjeo sam bas poslije kad sam kliknuo na link koji si dao. Dosta je Jugoslavija ucinila danasnjih drzavama bivse zajednice, a dosta ljudi danas pljuju po istoj :). Nema ni crnogorski iso, ali tek je usvojen pravopis, pa ce uskoro sve sto ide sa tim. Ako te interesuje, mogu da ti dam link crnogorskog pravopisa, ako te zanima crnogorski jezik to jest. Poz. Rave92 (talk) 20:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Da, zanima me! Flag of the Slovene Nation.svg Doncseczznánje 05:33, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Izvoli: http://www.gov.me/files/1248442673.pdf. Rave92 (talk) 05:45, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Hvala lijepa! Doncseczznánje 08:11, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Nema na cemu :-). Rave92 (talk) 19:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Oj svijetla majska zoro
Interesting content at: bs:Oj svijetla majska zoro. And even more interesting references. If you could supply me with the link of the Crnogorski pravopis (the Montenegrin orthography) that would be great. -- Imbris (talk) 22:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Weird references to be honest. Most of published in Zagreb, and "Audio verzija himne sa stranici vlade Crne Gore" wasn't it suposse to be writen "sa stranice"? As for pravopis: http://www.gov.me/files/1248442673.pdf. Cheers! Rave92 (talk) 05:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, bs.wiki is a collective work, made by many editors. Funny you should say that the references are wierd. I think it is much, much – more wierd – that anyone should belive Oj, junaštva svjetla zoro oj! ever existed under that title, and that it was/is (by some) mislead to be the "orriginal" song. As for the spelling, you could have corrected that yourself, couldn't you :) Did you read bs:Razgovor:Oj svijetla majska zoro? -- Imbris (talk) 20:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the link you provided. -- Imbris (talk) 20:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Can't really bother reading the whole discussion page. As for spelling, I though maybe it's correct in Bosnian language :-), since for e.g. they say "Tite" instead of "Tita", "Dine" instead of "Dina", so maybe this is correct too in Bosnian language :-). And what's with the sudden anti-Montenegrin on Hej Sloveni page? And you are welcome. Rave92 (talk) 21:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I have not written anything anti-Montenegrin on Hey, Slavs page. The discussion led to deletion of many useful data on the basis that DIREKTOR and Ivan Štambuk agreed with No such user and Zocky to delete everything which was not official. Thus lyrics in Bosnian language, and also Montenegrin language followed suit. Now Ivan Štambuk is (with false pretences) "pro-Montenegrin" in order to make compromising more difficult. And by the way I did not see you rushing in to comment on Ivan's idea to group the languages under the hat of Serbo-Croatian, nor in the issue about mentioning Croato-Serbian (at least twice, what No such user supports). -- Imbris (talk) 23:28, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * You should "bother" to read the begining of the discussion, because it contains valuable information on the anthem, which is not currently presented on the en.wiki (and should be presented). -- Imbris (talk) 23:34, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't follow much of the discussion on Hej Sloveni page, and you know I agreed with you to have both variants, but also that Serbo-Croatian term was more often used, especially in foreign languages. I supported Croato-Serbian because that's how it was called in Croatia. You can see the discussion when I talked about the dictionary I have that states Croatian-Serbian, but that didn't help in solving the problem. To me, best solution was mentioning Croato-Serbian at least once, and then only use SH as it was really more often used.

As for official, you can't have Serbo-Croatian and Serbian and Croatian separate. If we have in article Serbian and Croatian beside SH or HS, then we should add in other 2 languages. If we would only have SH and HS, then it's ok to leave the Montenegrin out.

Rave92 (talk) 05:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Serbian language, and also Croatian language were official languages in the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia up to 1954 (School year 1953/1954 to be exact), so they can be mentioned besides the Croato-Serbian and Serbo-Croatian. In the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina the language was called Serbo-Croatian or Croato-Serbian in the Constitution of that socialist republic from the year 1974. In the Socialist Republic of Montenegro, the official language existed as In the Socialist Republic of Montenegro there is an official language, but was not named in the Constitution of the Socialist Republic of Montenegro from the year 1974 (to the best of my knowledge on that information. Bosnian language and Montenegrin language should not be added because those language were not official in Yugoslavia, nor those languages were spoken under their modern name, I agree that they existed but not under their respective names. -- Imbris (talk) 00:07, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

And sorry for expression "Anti-Montenegrin", like I said, I didn't follow much the discussion. And I've read some of the discussion on talk page on Bosnian wiki, and I don't get it, what we should add? Can you please add here a suggestion what we should add on Oj, svijetla majska zoro. Cheers! Rave92 (talk) 05:07, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * First of all we should delete everything about the Oj, junaštva svjetla zoro oj! -- Imbris (talk) 00:07, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Rave92 (talk) 03:54, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * We could use the same argument, namely, officiality to remove unofficial texts from the article on the Montenegrin anthem. The lyrics which contain, the following Na Lovćenu Njegoš spava should also be excluded from the article. This can also be done in accordance with the officiality. I propose to you, that we both find even more sources, than it can be found at bs.wiki, to reference everything. Can you check the Constitution of the Socialist Republic of Montenegro from the year 1974, I seem to cannot find it. -- Imbris (talk) 19:07, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately no :(. I can't seem to find the constitution either :(. It is probably in some archives. Rave92 (talk) 23:14, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That is the beauty of "our" official documents, one cannot find any, except in some Belgrade libraries. -- Imbris (talk) 00:51, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Haha yeah. It's weird that I can't find it on the Internet... Rave92 (talk) 06:03, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

RE: Images?
Hi. Yeah, the images were and. Both are licensed as Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.0 Generic which isn't acceptable on Commons. The only CC licenses from flickr that are allowed are CC-BY and CC-BY-SA. Anything with "ND" (non-derivative) or "NC" (non-commercial) aren't considered "free" in terms of Commons. This page (on Commons) explains it a bit better. Hope this helps. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, ok, thanks for information. Cheers! Rave92 (talk) 15:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

That is not okay unless you email a copy of the permission you received for that OTRS team to verify. See WP:CONSENT for more information. If you have questions about the process, ask at the OTRS noticeboard. - Rjd0060 (talk) 13:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

It's not by mail, but rather by a message on flickr. Rave92 (talk) 13:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You need to forward a copy as outlined above, regardless. - Rjd0060 (talk) 13:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, so can you give me a direct link to where I need to send a copy of permission from author? I clicked on link you gave but it just says what OTRS team does. Rave92 (talk) 13:42, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:CONSENT. - Rjd0060 (talk) 13:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Dukljia
Hi, just thought that you might be interested in this edit, it seems to me that someone is trying to highjack the history of Crna Gora, thanks for your attention, Brutal Deluxe (talk) 00:49, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but the strange thing about it that he reverted it to older version :-/. Rave92 (talk) 09:36, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey. I don;t know how experienced you are on Wiki, but you seem incapable of reading references provided. Duklja is considered as one of the medieval Serb states. This is not my personal view, or even controversial,. But it is simply so. Now, I know you're Montenegrin, so this fact does not have to offend you. It does not mean that Duklja was subordinate to Serbia. Nor does it mean that modern Montenegrins are one and the same with Serbs, or that Montenegro should still be part of Serbia. Rather, in medieval times, the Byzantines considered the regions of Bosnia, Travunia, Duklja, Hum and Raska (which was inland, ie modern central Serbia) to have been settled by people with the same language, customs, appearance, etc, and categorised them as Serbs, and then perhaps invented a genealogy documenting the arrival of Serbs from southern Poland (White Serbia). In what is a semi-legendary account, there is a grain of truth, just as Jordanes' sagas abut the migration of Goths from Scandinavia, or the tale of Romulus and Remus.

EG (1): D P Hupchik. ''The Balkans. From Constantinople to Communism''. Palgrave MacMillan. ISBN. 1-4039-6417-3. Pg 54: Jovan Vladimir, who ruled a renewed Serb state centered on Zeta (present-day Montenegro)

(2)The New Cambridge Medieval History, IV. 1024- 1198. Part II. Page 136. ''In 1018 when Basil II conquered Bulgaria a number of Serbian principalities also fell under Byzantine rule. These included Raska.., Duklja.., Tribenje..., Zahumlje.., and Bosnia''

(3)The legend of Basil the Bulgar-slayer. Paul Stephenson. Page 42-43. Ljutovid's claim to be strategos not only of Zahumlje, but all Serbia suggests that he had been courted by the Emperor and awarded nominal rights over neighbouring lands, including Duklja

And these aren't Serbian authors, and for the record, nor am I. You remind me of a guy I met in Budva. He was Montenegrin. He tried to persuade me that Montenegrin and Serbian are "entirely different languages", despite the fact they are from common origin and 100% mutually intelligible, and were cnsidered the same language until 4 years ago. How can one reason with such blind-minded ignorance ?

Hxseek (talk) 03:16, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for mentioning MNE. Doclea is more and more interesting topic for historians in Montenegro, and it wasn't untill recently. Most of the books about Doclea on the Balkans were not realsed by Montenegrin historians, but Serbians, and a lot of historians from Serbia did it well. Even they mentioen Doclea as first Montenegrin state, while in Montenegro, in some books you could find Zeta as first Montenegrin state, which is wrong, and latter authors of the books fix it. So yeah, about Serbs and Croats, it is of course wrong to think about todays nations by looking at archives of Doclea, Raska, Zeta etc... as we know when nations in the real meaning started to exsist, and I understand that, but reader often can get confused if it doesn't know this facts (about nation).

As for the guy from Budva and language. They are not entirely different, they are almost the same languages, but it is also bad/wrong to say they are totally same languages, as they are not. If it was, then it would be normal to say belo (white) in MNE, while we say (bijelo). So that's small difference but still isn't the same, right? I like to see it like this, we have one language/group, and every state (BiH, HR, SRB & MNE) are part of that group, but they call the language by their state/nation, with some differences which "acclimatize" to the people that live in that country. Scandinavia has something similar. Rave92 (talk) 16:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * That's a good way to look at it, and it's good that you understand when nations really started existing. That is why I took the effort to clarify this whole issue about ethnicity in the Duklja article. My aim is to eventually modify all the ex-Yugo articles.


 * From what I know, Serbo-Croato-Bosnian-Montenegrin are far more similar than Swedish vs Danish, for example. I actually speak Macedonian and had no trouble communicating with the locals in Montenegro, which are a beautiful people, by the way


 * So, would you also say Rijeka for river, then. Seems more similar to Croatian ?

Hxseek (talk) 16:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, well yeah, Macedonians mostly understands us. We are all (south) Slavs, there are a lot of similarities in languages. Thanks for the compliment :), yes we say rijeka rather than reka, but all 4 languages are based on Shtokavian dialect. Well maybe you can even say Croatian more similar to Montenegrin xD. To me, the most close is Bosnian. Croats use a lot of words which we don't, so I can even say Serbian is in some kind closer language than Croatian, but like I said, it's just group with some differences, but we can all understand and speak :). Just e.g. some words from Bosnia will be funny to someone in Serbia and etc...

So are you interested in former Yugoslav states, like you read a lot about it or...? Rave92 (talk) 17:02, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Yep. I think I know a lot about it. Especially interested in the very early history - the beginings, archaeology, and a bit of genetics. Hxseek (talk) 22:28, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Cool :-). Rave92 (talk) 09:17, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Edit war
Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Duklja. While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked.

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If you, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 17:18, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Not vandalism
You need to stop labeling edits you disagree with as vandalism. It is not appropriate. WP:Vandalism has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia. Mislabeling content disputes as vandalism is considered disruptive and may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 17:29, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

How you would call the edit that was reverted by 3 other people on Wikipedia to my revision. If I would add that Roman Empire was "italian state", would that be vandalism? Rave92 (talk) 17:50, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure of which edit you are referring to, but just because it is incorrect doesn't make it WP:Vandalism. It's clear you haven't read read that policy.  Toddst1 (talk) 18:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Duklja, that article. It was reverted by others too but he/she doesn't stops. Of course I can add warning templates (I already added 2) but he doesn't seem to care, or start any discussion with me. Rave92 (talk) 18:59, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

September 2009
Thank you for making a report on Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, it appears that the editor you reported may not have engaged in vandalism, or the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned. Please note there is a difference between vandalism and unhelpful or misguided edits made in good faith. If the user continues to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report it. Thank you! Toddst1 (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Citat za nauciti napamet
"Mi smo Srbi narod najnesrecniji, svaki Srbin koji se prevjeri, prosto vjeru sto zagrli drugu, no mu prosto ne bilo pred bogom sto ocrni obraz pred svijetom, te se zvati Srbinom ne hoce. Ovo ti je Srbe iskobilo, robovima tudjim ucinilo."

Njegos, Scepan Mali

Nauci to napamet i ponavljaj svaki dan po sto puta, onda ce ti mozda biti jasnije ko su crnogorci uvek bili. Ne kazem da niste sad i vi neka nacija, kao i bosnjaci itd. Ali dedovima vam se okrecu u grobu, jer su ginuli za SRPSTVO —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.2.168.231 (talk) 04:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

"Ovo ti je Srbe iskobilo, robovima tudjim ucinilo."

Nisu Crnogorci bili niciji robovi samim tim da nije bila pod nicijom okupacijom z razliku od Srbije, niti je Njegos taj koji stvara neku naciju. On nije ginuo za srpstvo, niti Crnogorci. Reci mi gdje su to Crnogorci ginuli za srpstvo? Osim Mojkovacke bitke, gdje su branili Srbe i izgubili zbog toga. Lako je bilo nepismen narod uciti kako su oni neki srpski spartanci. Reci mi gdje se prije Petrovica koristila trobojka kao zastava CG?

O CRNOGORSKIJEM ZASTAVAMA

U rimskoj imperiji zastave (vexillum) su najčešće crvene boje, a podizali su ih vojskovođe nad šatorom, dajuci tako vojsci znak za pokret. Vizantijski carevi od Konstantina imali su svoju zastavu (labarum). Konstantin je na zastavi imao krst, ali je ti simbol docnije mijenjan.

Zastave su u srednjem vijeku uvodile pojedine države kao i gradovi. Trobojnice se javljaju tek za vrijeme francuske revolucije (1789). Mađarska je uvela trobojnu zastavu 1848. Ljudevit Gaj je 1848. sastavio hrvatsku trobojku (crveno-bijelo-plavo) koja je slobodno upotrebljavana tek od 1860. godišta. Rusija je najprije, do 1897, imala crno-narandžasto-bijelu zastavu, a na prijedlog jedne državne komisije car Aleksandar je 1896. donio Ukaz, kojim je ustanovljena bijelo-plavo-crvena trobojka. Carski petrogradski puk imao je trobojku (bijelo-plavo-crvenu), koju je kao simbol zaštite uzela Karlovačka, a docnije i Beogradska mitropolija.

Fermanom turskoga sultana Mahmuda (1835) prvi put je u Srbiju uvedena trobojnica (crveno-plavo-bijela) "da se od visokog dževleta moga dade i srpskom narodu trobojnica barjak". A sultanovim fermanom iz 1838. goda dodate su na zastavu na crvenom polju, kao simbol podaništva Turskoj, četiri zvijezde, a na plavom polju nacionalni grb. Osim toga, poznato je da je u vrijeme srpskoga ustanka bilo više različnijeh zastava (bijelo-zelena i druge).

Nije ni poznato kakva je bila zastava prvog crnogorskog kralja Mihaila (kralj od 1077.g.), kao ni zastava koju je papa Kliment II uputio kralju Bodinu kao znak kraljevskog dostojanstva. Sačuvana je crnogorska zastava iz doba dinastije Balšića koja je likovno obrađena u duhu srednjovjekovne spekulativne mistike: na sredini polja nalazi se prikaz uskrnuća Hristova nad kojim lebdi golubica, simbol Duha svetoga, a sasvijem na vrhu je simbol Svetoga trojstva – trougao u koji je ucrtano Božje oko. Crnogorski iseljenici u Peroju (Istra) sačuvali su crnogorsku zastavu iz 17.vijeka crvene boje sa bijelijem krstom u sredini. Ti krst na crnogorskoj zastavi nije u obliku Malteškog krsta, kako je uobičajeno objašnjenje, već u obliku pljosnatoga krsta, kako se u nauci taj oblik naziva. Pomenuta zastava je bila tada vojna i državna.

Iz Njegoševog doba sačuvan je opis crnogorske zastave koji je načinio 1838.g. Bartolomeo Bjazoleto. Ova zastava je bila postavljena na Tablji iznad Cetinjskog manastira. "Na vrhu njezinom bio je dulji stub na kojemu je lepršao barjak od svile boje blijedo zute, a po sredini njega mali crveni krst."

U vrijeme knjaza Danila I Petrovića Njegoša crnogorska zastava je bila crvena, kao i ona perojska, a na sredini je bio izvezen "grb zemaljski" (crnogorski dvoglavi orao). Ova zastava je ostala do kraja postojanja suverene Crne Gore kao državna.

Prva crnogorska pomorsko-trgovacka zastava uspostavljena je početkom 1870. i bila je dvobojna crveno-bijelo-crvena sa bijelijem krstom. Sljedećeg goda, krst je zamijenjen crnogorskom krunom i kraljevijem inicijalima na plavom polju. U crnogorskom Ustavu (1905) u članu 39. stoji:"Narodne su boje crvena,plavetna i bijela", ali su te boje korišćene samo za lente na medaljama i ordenju, a ne i za zastave. Zastava sa tijem bojama iz doba kralja Nikole je neka vrsta dvorske zastave i nije figurirala ka zvanična državna.

O CRNOGORSKOM GRBU

Grb triju imperija Simbol pobjede Izmišljeni grb Zlatni orao Crnogoraca Imperijalna propaganda

GRB TRIJU IMPERIJA

Heraldika pokušava da odgonetne pojave pojedinijeh amblema, puteve njihovog preuzimanja i problikovanja. Dvoglavi orao javlja se kao gradski grb još u Babilonu. U nauci se smatra da su ti motiv (orla) od Asiraca preuzeli Hetiti, narod koji je, u istočnoj Maloj Aziji, imao državu (od oko 2000. Do 1225.g. prije n.e.). Predstavu dvoglavog orla Hetiti su koristili kao ukrasni arhitektonski sastojak.

SIMBOL POBJEDE

U rimskomu carstvu orao (jednoglavi) uziman je kao simbol pobjede. Istočno Rimsko carstvo (Bizant) u doba dinastije Komnen, preuzima dvoglavoga orla iz maloazijskoga kulturnog nasljeđa, koristeći ga kao ukras na dvorskijem odijelima. Može se pretpostaviti da je dvoglavi orao simbolizirao objedinjavanje crkvene i svjetovne moći. Tkanine sa dvoglavijem orlovima izrađivane su u radionicama sa islamskoga područja.

Značajan je podatak da Vaseljenska patrijaršija i danas ima u svojemu pečatu dvoglavoga orla (više glava orla je carska kruna, u desnoj kandži je krst a u lijevoj carska jabuka; ispod orla, na purpurnom jastuku, prekrštena su dva ključa koji bi mogli označavati otvaranje nebeskoga i zemaljskoga života; iznad krune su slova I(sus) K(rst).

U hrišćanstvu je orao, zahvaljujući vjerovanju da posjeduje sposobnost obnavljanja mladosti, simbolizirao vječni zivot, pa i uskrsnuće Hristovo.

Dvoglavi orao iz pečata Vaseljenske patrijašije, kao i sa bizantijskoga dvora, preuziman je od nekijeh pravoslavnijeh država i crkava. Bizantijske princeze, prilikom udaje na izvanjske dvorove, prenosile su nakit (prstenje i dr.) sa predstavom dvoglavoga orla. To su isto činjeli bizantijski freskoslikari i kamenoresci; radeći za druge dvorove, koristili su dvoglavoga orla kao ukrasni motiv. Neki dvorovi preuzimanjem bizantijskog orla ispoljavali su i pretenzije prema Bizantu. Al. Solovjev govori o tome da su slovenski vladari – stupanjem u "krug vizantijske kulture" – nosili odijela od tkanina na kojima je predstavljen dvoglavi orao. Ruski knez Ivan III, pošto se oženio bizantijskom princezom (1472), sinovicom potonjega bizantijskog cara Konstantina IX, kao grb uzeo je bizantijskog dvoglavog orla, što znači da je to učinio istodobno, kad je i Ivan Crnojević uveo ti isti grb kod Crnogoraca. Pošto je Bizant bio već pao, a Vaseljenska patrijašija ostala pod Turcima, tada se u Rusiji javlja osvajačka ideja, da je Moskva "treći Rim" i (nova) "zaštitnica" pravoslavlja.

Kada je papa Lav III obnovio Zapadno Rimsko carstvo, krunisavši 800. goda Karla Velikoga za cara, preuzet je, iz tradicije staroga Rima, (jednoglavi) orao kao obilježje carskog dostojanstva. Docnije, od 1401. Do 1806. goda, uzet je dvoglavi orao za grb germanskoga Svetoga Rimskog Carstva.

Dvoglavog orla imalo je više feudalnijeh porodica na Zapadu, kao što je poznata italijanska porodica Este, koja je, od XIII st., vladala Ferarom i Modenom, i dala vojvode i crkvene velikodostojnike. (Na štitu svojega grba imala je, pored ostalijeh simbola, i dva dvoglava orla)

IZMIŠLJENI GRB

U Srbiji se javljaju promjenljivi amblemi i ukrasi (ljiljan, šljem, bizantiski dvoglavi orao), "nepovezani u cjelinu grba" za sve vrijeme trajanja nemanjićke feudalne države. Neki autori pozivaju se na portolan (vodič) A. Dulčerta, za koji se zna kada je pisan (1339?) i tvrde da je sredinom XIV st. dvoglavi orao bio "simbol" srpske države, ali se tu ne radi o grbu, jer na crtežu dvoglavi orao je, bez štita, apliciran na zastavu. Grb u obliku dvoglavoga orla u Srbiji se javlja u vrijeme Stefana Lazarevića, pošto je proglašen, u Carigradu, za despota, što je izraz njegovoga vazalnog odnošaja. O tom grbu nalazi se podatak kod Urliha Rihentala, iz druge decenije XV v.

Neki srpski autori su smatrali da se dvoglavi orao kao simbol prvi put javlja na sakosu humskoga kneza Miroslava, koji je prikazan kao ktitor u crkvi Sv. Petra u Bijelom Polju. Kasnije arheološka i istorijska istraživanja dovela su u sumnju to datiranje, pomjerajući vrijeme nastanka freske između 1264. i 1305. g, kao ktitorstvo kneza Miroslava, vidjeći u toj ulozi kralja Uroša. Iz ovoga se može zaključiti da to pitanje ostaje otvoreno.

I za srpski grb u obliku krsta sa četiri ognjila, koji je također bizantijski amblem, iz vremena dinastije Paleologa, sa prvom simbolikom: krst, između čijih kraka su upisana četiri slova B (basileus). Neki autori se domišljaju da bi mogao biti sredinom XIV st. grb Srbije, i ako ni kao porodični ni kao državni grb u srednjovjekovnoj Srbiji "nije nikad postojao" (V. Karić). Tvorac te legende je Mavro Orbini, autor Kraljevstva Slovena (1601), koji je, između ostalog, i neke grbove izmislio, "u nekoj maglovitoj patriotskoj težnji", među kojima i grb u obliku krsta sa četiri ognjila. U XVIII vijeku, kada je vladala grbomanija, ti izmišljeni grb (kao i oni u obliku dvoglavog orla) više puta je variran i prepečatan (H. Zefarović, Z. Orfelin i dr.), pa zahvaljujući takvoj popularizaciji Orbinijev grb stvarno je i postao grb vazalne Srbije, 1835. godišta. Međutijem, pošto se Milan Obrenović proglasio za kralja Srbije, 1882. g., uveo je kao grb – dvoglavoga orla, na čije je grudi apliciran raniji grb – krst sa četiri ognjila.

ZLATNI ORAO CRNOGORACA

Stojan Novakovic je utvrdio da se prvi poznati grb u Crnoj Gori javlja u vrijeme dinastije Balšića, u osmoj deceniji XIV v; srebrna repata zvijezda na crvenom polju, a na čelenci vučja glava s vratom. U vrijeme dinastije Crnojevića u Crnoj Gori grb je predstavljao: zlatni dvoglavi orao, sa krunicama na glavama. Može se opravdano pretpostaviti da je Ivan Crnojević preuzeo grb (dvoglavi orao) od albanskog velikaša Skenderbega (Đurđa Kastriota), poslije njegove smrti (17.01.1468), izražavajući tako feudalni legitimitet prema Skenderbegovim teritorijama, jer je Skenderbegova sestra Marija bila majka Ivanova.

Crnogorski dvoglavi orao, kome je kasnije dodat lav, ostaje, sve do likvidacije Crne Gore kao suverene države (1921), trajni državni grb koji se javlja i na državnijem pečatima ("Mohur vse Cernie Gori", "Pečat Crnogorskoga praviteljstvujušćega senata"). Grb Crnogorske pravoslavne crkve iz sredine XVIII vijeka sadrži dvoglavoga orla sa krunom, dvije ruke u oklopu, štit s prekrštenijem ključevima (kao i na Pečatu Vaseljenske patrijašije), s krstom, s lijeve, i mitropolitskijem štapom s desne bande.

Crnogorski grb i zastavu iz vremena knjaza Danila, prezentirao je, u Bibliografskom vjesniku (1982), naučnoj javnosti dr Jevto M. Milović, po knjizi o grbovima njemačkog autora Siebmachera, koja je pečatana 1857. godišta.

IMPERIJALNA PROPAGANDA

Pošto je dvoglavi orao, sa varijacijama u postavci krila, broju pera, i boji bio grb triju imperija (Bizantijskoga Carstva, germanskoga Svetoga Rimskog Carstva i Ruskoga Carstva), kao i još nekijeh država i feudalnih porodica - nije moguće govoriti o originalnosti osnovnoga motiva.

Insistiranje imperijalne propagande na asimilatorskoj upotrebi srpskijeh državnijeh amblema dobilo je drastične forme posljednjijeh godišta u odnosu na crnogorski narod. Propagatori su uvjereni da je to značajno sredstvo (kao oglašavanje slovenskoga pisma ćirilice - "srpskom", sprječavanje Crnogoraca da svoj jezik nazovu crnogorskijem, itd) za pretvaranje drugijeh naroda u tzv. srpski politički narod. Zato se pokušava ubijediti crnogorski narod da je grb Kraljevine Srbije jedinstven i originalan, a da je crnogorski grb "proizašao" iz nepostojećega grba iz doba dinastije Nemanjić. Pri tome, najbitnije je Crnogorce dovesti u situaciju da zaborave sopstvene grbove i svoju tradiciju. Toga radi je korišćen srpski grb: krst i četiri ognjila kao što je činjeno, početkom XX vijeka, po Makedoniji, Bosni, Hercegovini i Hrvatskoj, zbog lakoće pisanja i lažnog značenja koje je pridavano ognjilima ("Srbin ima četir slova stara / samo sloga Srbina spasava / Srbi braćo svi na desno krilo / ne bi l' naše sve do kraja bilo").

CRNOGORSTVO I CRNOGORSKO SRPSTVO

" SRPSTVO" JE NEETIČKI, NADNARODNOSNO - NACIONALNI SLOJ I DOGRADNJA NAD ETNIČKIJEM CRNOGORSTVOM

Crnogorsko (nacionalno i državno) pitanje ne može se suštastveno shvatiti bez razjašnjenja pojmova Crnogorstvo i Srpstvo, njihovoga međuodnošaja, crnogorskoga "srpstva" i oblika "srpstva" u Crnoj Gori.

Crnogorstvo je podumijentno, neposredno - životno načelo Crne Gore. Ono je osnovna kopča zajedništva svijeh koji žive u demokratskoj, pravnoj i suverenoj crnogorskoj, kao svojoj, državi. Crnogorstvo je posebito čojstvo, crnogorski vid univerzalizma. Čojsko i junačko Crnogorstvo je "odbrana sebe od drugoga, a drugoga od sebe".

Crnogorci su istorijski i državotvorni narod koji je stvarao, čuvao i sačuvao Crnu Goru i pronosio slavu njezinoga imena. Crna Gora je stoljećima domovina Muslimana, Albanaca, Hrvata, Srbo - Crnogoraca, Srba i drugijeh koji u njoj žive. Tako su je dugo i doživljavali. Ne trebuje im druga država i otadžbina osim ove koju imaju. Crna Gora im je zajedničko naslijeđe, sudbina, država, domovina i interes.

Tradicionalno naglašavanje crnogorske državotvornosti, tradicije i istorije, u stvari, je nejasan i nedovoljno primjeren politički i ideoloski vid ispoljavanja etničkog Crnogorstva.

Pojam Crnogorstvo je sažimak hiljadugodišnje sopstvene istorije i neprekidnosti dukljansko - zetsko - crnogorske tradicije, državotvornosti i kulture unutar kojih se (pre)uobličavalo i razvijalo narodnosno, nacionalno, socijalno, lično i ljudsko samooslobođenje Crnogoraca i ostalijeh u Crnoj Gori. Etničko Crnogorstvo je neraskopčivo oplemenjeno i crnogorskijem čojskim junaštvom. Izvorno mu odgovara sveta vjera Crnogoraca: vladimiroslavlje, vasilioslavlje, stevanoslavlje, a vrhuni u petrosavlju. Nose nazive po Svetomu Vladimiru, Sv. Vasiliji Ostroškom, Sv.Stevanu Piperskom i Sv.Petru Cetinjskom. Iako se proz istoriju izvorno crnogorsko biće prožimalo i orođavalo sa raznijem uticajima, pa i vjerskijem, Crnogorstvo je neraspučivo od izvorne čistote pravoslavlja Crnogoraca - petroslavlja, odnosno slobodoslavlja, slobodoljublja. Takvo Crnogorstvo je nešto više i šire od samoga crnogorskoga etnosa. Za vjeru Crnogoraca - slobodoslavlja - nije svetoslavlje iznad pravoslavlja i petroslavlja, niti je Sv. Sava najveći svetac, posebito ne viši i od samoga Hrista, kako se to u politiziranom svetoslavlju hoće nametati. Kada se bude biralo izmedju Sv. Save i svetoslavlja, na jednoj, i crnogorskijeh svetaca i petroslavlja - narodne religije Crnogoraca, slobodoslavlja, slobodijade, na drugoj bandi, izbor će pasti na ovo drugo, na Crnogorstvo. Između Sv. Save i Petrovića Njegoša vazda će se izabrati Crnogorac.

Rečeno Crnogorstvo se kroz sopstvenu istoriju prožimalo i dopunjavalo novijem, neetničkijem i nadetničkijem, višenacionalnijem orođenim slojevima i nadgradnjom. Na jednoj bandi je uticaj i sloj "srpske svijesti i tradicije", posebito "srpskog pravoslavlja ("srpske vjere")", kao đelička širega istočno-pravoslavnog kruga, čiji je konkretan oblik crnogorsko "srpstvo". Na drugoj bandi je uticaj i sloj zapadne tradicije i svijesti kao rezultata mediteransko-evropskoga vala. Naravno, tu je poznije i uticaj islama. Na podumijenti izvornoga i samonikloga Crnogorstva ovi uticaji se kroz istoriju miješaju i orođavaju, do Nemanjića uglavnom sa Zapada, poslije njih više sa Istoka.

Samo prisustvo "srpske svijesti i tradicije", "srbovanja" i "srpstva" u Crnoj Gori jeste nesporna činjenica, koja se mora uvažavati. No, umah se mora uviđeti da njezini razni pojavni oblici suštastveno nijesu vid ispoljavanja nacionalnoga (i uopšte etničkoga) iskazivanja Crnogoraca. Uz puno njezino poštovanje, mora se i kritički ispitivati kao bilo koja druga pojava, politički i religiozno-kulturni fenomen, posebno u onijem pojavnim oblicima koji se stalno nastoje mistifikovati, ideologizovati i politizirati, navlastito, onijeh koji su napadni, isključivi i opasni za samo Crnogorstvo i ostala načela.

Sa širenjem nemanjićke države i crkve prodirala je u Crnu Goru i "državna srpska vjera", "srpsko pravoslavlje", koje je vrlo rano stvorilo svetiteljski kult i oreol gotovo svijeh Nemanjića. Preko Srpske crkve, dinastija srpske države postaje i kod nas sastavni dio crkvene (pravoslavne) tradicije. Crnogorski etnos i etos se ogrću "posestrimskom" višenacionalnom srpskom crkvom, višenacionalnom "srpskom vjerom", koja napadno nastoji da se prikaže kao jednonacionalna (srpska, svetosavska). Tu je i (spolja) primljen zajednički "srpski obred" ("krštenje po srpski", "srpsko krštenje") i u borbi "pobratimljeno" "pravoslavno srpstvo", koje se kasnije (u XIX v.) hoće postaviti kao (romantičarsko) svetoslavle, odnosno kao "srpsko pravoslavlje", "srpstvo".

Posebita tisućugodna crnogorska istorija i samostalna država su prvorazredni temelj i ram uobličavanja nesumnjivoga etničkog Crnogorstva koji je stub držač ostalijeh uticaja i njegove nadgradnje. Samostalna istorijska i državno-politička tradicija crnogorska, i u ramu njih crnogorsko etničko uobličavanje, usložnjava se prisustvom Srpske pravoslavne crkve u Crnoj Gori. Ovo srednjovjekovno dvojstvo (samostalna crnogorska država, a Srpska crkva u njoj) nemanjićkoga perioda i kasnije uticace i uslovljavaće da se etničko Crnogorstvo dopunjava slojem "srpske tradicije i svijesti", tzv. "srpskijem okvirom", "srpstvom". Tijem se etničko Crnogorstvo prekriva i zamagljuje složenijem pojmom "pravoslavno srpstvo". Srpska pravoslavna crkva i njezina ideologija ("državna srpska vjera") su drugorazredan, naknadni nenarodnosni činilac i ram etnogeneze Crnogoraca. Shvatano u jedinstvu sa etničkijem Crnogorstvom javlja se kao tzv. crnogorsko "srpstvo". Svjesnijem i nesvjesnijem miješanjem, zamjenjivanjem i podmetanjem etničkoga Crnogorstva i takvoga "srpstva" u zamagljenoj (samoj sebi nejasnoj) svijesti, Crnogorci se neosnovano nastoje prikazati kao (etnički) Srbi, a rečeno dvojstvo kao narodnosno (Srbi) i nacionalno, odnosno regionalno (Crnogorci) dvojstvo samijeh Crnogoraca.

"Srpstvo" u Crnoj Gori je, dakle, ideoloska, crkveno-politička, borbeno-saveznička, osvajačka, vjersko-kulturna (nadnacionalna) naslaga nad etničkijem Crnogorstvom. Predstavlja, zanago, njegov neizbježni širi i dodirni politički i religiozno-kulturni činilac. Poseban činilac njihovog zbližavanja im je zajednička patnja i strah od spoljne opasnosti Vizantije i Turaka. Međutijem, ima i onu drugu, tamnu, najčešće zloupotrebljavanu stranu, koja prijeti da ugrozi i uništi samo etničko Crnogorstvo.

Rave92 (talk) 09:51, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions, but since this is the English Wikipedia, we cannot accept text in other languages. However, if this is an original article, perhaps you would like to translate it into English.

If you want to contribute in, your contributions are more than welcome at. If you wish to have an article from translated into English, make a request at Translation.

You may also enjoy becoming a part of Wikipedia's effort to coordinate across different languages.

For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! Toddst1 (talk) 22:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Edit war
Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Duklja. While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Toddst1 (talk) 22:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Duklja
Hi again. I am inclined to make another adjustment to the origns part. To split it into a political development and an 'ethnic' one. See what you think (the references obviuosly will need formatting)

Political development
By the ascendency of Emperor Heraclius, most of the Balkans was abandoned by the Byzantines. Archaeological evidence and written sources confirm that only a few coastal cities, such as Kotor, remained occupied by Romani. (Curta SEIMA p 102; DAI chapter 29) Little is known about affairs in the Balkans during the 8th century, however, settlement by Slavs and Avars is attested archaeologically (Curta 102). By the 9th century, the Adriatic Sklaviniae began to attract the attention of historical sources. This coincides with the expansion of Frankish influence into southeastern Europe, whilst the Byzantines concurrently began to recover some control over coastal Dalmatia. The decline of Avar hegemony over the western Balkans allowed local chieftains to consolidate some kind of independent power (See EE in EMA) around newly forged regional Slavic identities (Pohl, (Pohl, Debating the Middle Ages, p 20). Moreover, the emerging local potentates became important players in Frankish and Byzantine affairs (see Guduscani article) and were engaged into vassalage. The prestige and military advantages afforded by such positions enabled them to consolidate their rule over embryonic medieval states (EEIMA). However, the power of leading zhupani was centred on their own strongholds (castellas), and relied on the cooperation and loyalty of other nobles to exercise control over greater geographical areas.

Ethnic identity
The most important early source on South Slavic peoples in the De Administrando Imperio by the Byzantine Emperor, Constantine Porphyrogenitus. In chapter 29 of DAI, Porphyrogentius writes that several “Slavonic nations” came into existence in Dalmatia: Serbs, Croats, Zachlumoi, Terbuniotoi, Kanalitai, Arentanoi and Diokletianoi (p 125). He distinguishes between the Slavs and the Romani who inhabited the islands and fortified cities. In subsequent chapters, he states that the principalities of Serbia, Zahumlje, Travunia and Pagania had been settled by the 'unbaptised Serbs' who migrated from White Serbia. However, he gives no specific origin narrative for the inhabitants of Duklja (as highlighted by Budak 228), only that the region had been made desolate by the Avars and "repopulated in the time of the Emperor Heraclius (610-40 AD), just as were Croatia and Serbia". Several interpretations have been offered to explain this. John Fine Jr. has argued 'since Serbs settled in regions along its borders, presumably this (Duklja) would have been a Serb region", although as far as he is concerned, precise definition is not required given that, in such early times, the Slavs in the western Balkans were an ethnically homogeneous mass divided into several tribal units. Sima Cirkovic, argued that the Dukljiani were a Serbian tribe who had appropriated a new name, adopted from the city of the Dioclea (as CP suggests in DAI). (The Serbs, p 12) Neven Budak, on the other hand, has argued that Constantine offers no further genealogy on the Dukliani because “Dioklea had been under direct Byzantine control, and there was no need to explain further the origin of its inhabitants, who for the Byzantines were obvious Slavs without any other affiliation”. (Budak p 228) Curta posits a similar line of reasoning. The equation of Zachlumia, Pagania and Terbunia with a Serbian genealogy, he argues, reflected the political situation during Constantine’s time, in the mid tenth century. For Duklja, he had little to say about its specific affiliation because, prior to the late tenth century, it was under the direct Byantine rule. Porphyrogenitus’ narrative is not indicative of the ethnographic situation from the time of the Slavic settlement (Budek 225), rather his reflections on ethnic identity were related to the political subordination of one group in relation to another (Budek p 228).

As Duklja enters the historical spotlight from the eleventh century onwards, its rulers are often designated by various ethonyms. For example Vojislav is referred to as “the Dukljan” (Stephenson p 125), as well as archon of the Serbs (Stephenson p 126). The 11th century Byzantine historian John Skylitzes refers to his successor, Michael, as ruler of the “Triballoi and Serbs” (Stephenson 139) as well as a ruler of “Croats”, whilst the Pope referred to him as “King of the Slavs” (Cirkovic p 26). The peoples of Duklja were also referred to as “Dalmatians” (Budek p 229). A concise conclusion from this mosaic of ethonyms might be hard to elucidate. However, both Florin Curta and John Fine, amongst other medievalists, have argued that ethonyms such as Serb or a Croat were primarily political labels referring to a dux and his retinue of nobles, whilst Slav was a generic ethnic appellation often used by western sources. On occasions, they even used archaisms, such as Triballoi, when referring to the population of a given region.

In the pre-nationalist Middle Ages, it has been argued that ethnicity only mattered to the upper stratas of society. The loyalty of commoners extended little further than one’s clan or village. (Pohl p 17) Whatever the case, throughout its history Duklja developed cultural and historical ties with, both, eastern and western powers. Nevertheless, politically, it is generally seen to be one of the medieval Serb states

It seems great, and I know we went trough this already, but do we really need to mention Serbian state? I know that you and I know what that means but it confuses the reader. In books of history (which were used in Yugoslavia by the way) state that Duklja was first Montenegrin state, while a lot of books mention Serbian. Of course, that term Serbian doesn't have much to do with Serbs today, but some people use it to negate Montenegrin nationality and continuity of Montenegrin state that we know today. Maybe we should have a section like this two you suggested (separate) and explain what term Serbian means, and that it doesn't have any particular connection with todays Serbian state. I hope you get what I want to say, beside that, to me this is very good. Cheers! Rave92 (talk) 19:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure . I understand what you're saying, hopefully the medieval part makes it clear. I understand where you're coming from, my heritage is Macedonian, and its irritating seeing when ignorants say that Macedonia is Bugarian becuase it was part of the "Bulgarian Empire", not understanding that "Bulgarian" today has a rather different meaning. Hxseek (talk) 04:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Exactly :-). Do you visit Macedonia often? (As I understand you are in diaspora) Anyway you have my support for this suggestion. Rave92 (talk) 09:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah. I had a good trip to Europe this July. Went to Prague-> Bitola - Ohrid- Skopje -Hvar - Dubrovnik - Budva. Eastern Europe is the best. Most beautiful women are Slavs :) I want to come back next year Hxseek (talk) 11:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

They sure are :-). Did you like Montenegro? Do you live in USA or...? Rave92 (talk) 18:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, Montenegro was really nice - well Kotor and Budva were. Quite similar to Croatian Dalmatiam but a little less developed. I thought the people there were very nice. People down south (ie Macedonia, Montenegro) are definitely 'warmer". It seemed to me that some of the Dalmatian tourist industry people were a bit up themselves a bit, although I was in really tourist areas which probably aren't "real" Croatia. Met a few Bosnian Serbs and Muslims also. Everyone is all so similar. Makes you think why the country had to break up ? Staying unified needn't obstruct regions and republics from developing and celebrating their unique regional characteristics.

I grew up in Australia, Sydney. Its a cool city to grow up in. Its a rich city, but life seems better in the Balkans. Hxseek (talk) 14:21, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Well hard to explain, but we just can't live together I guess :-). Sydney sure looks like a cool city, maybe I would visit it sometime :-). How many hours did you travel from Australia to the Balkans? Rave92 (talk) 15:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

There's usually a stop-over in Asia somewhere, depending on day and airline. With my journey, it was 8.5 hours to Soeul, with an overnight stay, then 10 hours or so from Soeul to Prague. Long journey but well worth it Hxseek (talk) 01:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Damn, that sure is long, can you at least visit Seoul (like to leave you hotel) xD? Rave92 (talk) 12:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, THe airline put us up in a nice hotel in downtown Soeul. I had a friend from uni that ive there, so we went out, etc Other stop-overs are usually in Bankgok or Singapore, depending on airline. At an earlier trip, I had the stopover in Bangkok and it was only a few hours, so no time to leave airport, but there's room there for you to have a shower and go for a nap, get massage, etc (for a smal fee, of course) Hxseek (talk) 01:47, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

That's cool. You probably went with Lufthansa :-)? Rave92 (talk) 10:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Montenegrinsoldier.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Montenegrinsoldier.jpg I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Martin H. (talk) 18:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

October 2009
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war at Duklja. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below.

Balkan-related sanction imposed
This message is to notify you that you are now subject to a sanction limiting you to 1 revert per week on Balkan-related articles as a result of your repeated edit warring. This sanction has been recorded here. Toddst1 (talk) 19:21, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

You didn't blocked that other account, even though his account is just created to revert edits, which his reverts was reverted by 3 other people. Consensus was reached, as he deleted Montenegrin language, while some deleted Serbian Cyrillic, I added both, while he deletes Montenegrin one. It was ok for me, Hxseek and few other wikipedians that it was a South Slavic state. What's the point of reaching consensus when he doesn't want to talk. If he do, he would answer to my warnings. Bye. Rave92 (talk) 19:25, 11 October 2009 (UTC).

It looks like I am not the only one that reverts his edits: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_Bodin

but no, ban the one that actually works on improving wikipedia. Rave92 (talk) 22:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You were blocked for edit warring on Duklja not the edit war you were in on Constantine Bodin. I don't watch every file on wikipedia, however since you were clearly edit warring on Constantine Bodin as well, so I feel that the 1RR/Week sanction is more than justified. As for, you are correct that the user was edit warring. Too bad you didn't communicate that on the user's talk page.   Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Toddst1 (talk) 20:00, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

The point is, that user "Bersus" wasn't banned, and he was the one reverting and doing vandalism. He still does it. Rave92 (talk) 09:01, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you sure? Toddst1 (talk) 11:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

He wasn't when I wrote you the message (on the day I was blocked that is), and someone reverted his edit and he still continues to do it. Rave92 (talk) 12:31, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked for 1 fortnight for violating your 1RR sanction on Prokletije. Please note your 1RR sanction remains in effect and further violations will lead to longer, possibly indefinite blocking. Toddst1 (talk) 23:52, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I have one edit per articles everyday or what? I didn't quite understand this. Rave92 (talk) 16:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You may contribute to any article as often as you wish. You may not revert more than once per week on any one Balkan-related article. Reverting means undoing the effects of one or more edits. You may revert two different Balkan-related articles in the same week but not the same article twice. Toddst1 (talk) 18:19, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I get it. Rave92 (talk) 18:19, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

November 2009
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 5 weeks to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war&#32;at Bar, Montenegro. Please remember that you remain subject to a restriction limiting you to 1 revert per week on Balkan-related articles. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. Toddst1 (talk) 13:59, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

And of course he is not blocked even though his account is created just to change from Montenegrin to Serbian? Rave92 (talk) 14:01, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

How it can be a content dispute? How the official language is content dispute? Yes, I was blocked but the Serbs weren't, as like you have double standards for them. I guess the solution is like they do. Rave92 (talk) 16:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If your disruption continues after the release of your current block, you will likely be banned from editing all Balkan-related articles on the English Wikipedia.Toddst1 (talk) 14:44, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Language is not "content dispute". Rave92 (talk) 16:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Famous_Montenegrins.png
Odkad su Njegosi etnicki crnogorci? /User_talk:Ajdebre

Ispod slike pise Crnogorci ili ljudi sa crnogorskim korijenima, bez ako mislis da je Njegos bio sa Marsa? Rave92 (talk) 13:48, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Serb tribes
Pozdrav brate.Posto vidim da si ti jedan od rijetkih koji brani interese Crne Gore od ovih srpskih nacionalista,zamolio bih te da pogledas clanak "Serb tribes" i vidis mozes li sto ucinjet.Zamisli,oni su crnogorska plemena(sa sve Cetinjanima)prozvali srpskim i jos to stavili u naslov topika.Da neko ne zna pomislio bi da su ta plemena iz Sumadije.Nevjerovatno koliko daleko ljudska glupost ide.Ja,nazalost,nisam dovoljno dobar sa engleskim jezikom da bih mogao znacajnije promjene pravit,a ako se nesto i promijeni oni to odmah na staro vrate i izgleda da za to imaju podrsku administracije.Ja sam nov na vikipediji,pa ne znam kako sve funkcionise i moze li se nekom zalit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.155.40.206 (talk) 22:27, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Zdravo, zdravo :). Branim ali ne bas 100% uspjesno jer ih ima previse, a o podrsci tek da ne pricamo. Najbolje bi bilo da se registrujes i kad ti neko vrati, ides na History i imas dugme undo i vratis, ponekad ne moze pa moras manuelno. Vjeruj mi, dok ja nijesam bio ovako aktivan, nijesi mogao da nadjes 3 artikla sa crnogorskim jezikom :D. Treba da nas bude vise da bi mogli da odbranimo CG. Evo mene su npr banovali i samo mogu da pisem na svojoj stranici :/, a mozes da pogadjas zasto. Poz! Rave92 (talk) 18:08, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Da li to znaci da neces vise moc uopste da pises?Vidio sam i da su blokirali onog Paxa koji je najuporniji bio. Sve nekako,ali ovo sa plemenima je prevrsilo svaku mjeru,klasicni pokusaj kradje tudje istorije.Ali,neka ih-zbog toga sto cine vraca im se sve troduplo.Na kraju ce izgleda onaj vic o nokiji obistinit. Ne mogu samo vjerovat da se ne moze nikom zalit na ovako ociglednu ultranacionalisticku propagandu.Mozda bi trebalo zamolit neke od ovih drugih ex-yu naroda da pomognu,ako su voljni-moze li se to? Registrovacu se,ali ko sto rekoh,malo me zajebava engleski.Razumijem sve sta pise,ali tesko da mogu napisat dobar clanak. Pozdrav. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.155.40.206 (talk) 03:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Pa evo istice valjda danas ban, ali ako uradim nesto, odma ide ban tako da ne mogu nista da radim. Je li mozes da revertujes ovog Cinema na artikle o gradovima CG (Podgorica, Plav...) svuda stavlja srpski jezik. Rave92 (talk) 11:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

January 2010
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Toddst1 (talk) 16:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Rave92 (talk) 12:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I've transcribed this info to Sockpuppet investigations/Rave92. Toddst1 (talk) 17:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)