Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Illyrian (South Slavic)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. There is a clear absence of consensus for deletion, and it does not seem that AfD is the place to resolve issues with respect to how this subject should be named or what it should be grouped with. BD2412 T 00:39, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Illyrian (South Slavic)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Reason Zixt2010 (talk) 14:48, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

The article as it stands is misleading. Illyrian language was a name sometimes used to refer to Croatian in the 15-19th centuries. This is evident from a list of Croatian dictionaries: List of Croatian dictionaries and the list of Croatian grammars: Croatian-language grammar books in Wikipedia. See also the standard work on Slavic lexicography by Edward Stankiewicz “Grammars and Dictionaries of the Slavic Languages from the Middle Ages Up to 1850”, originally published in 1984, latest edition is from 2016.

The article offers no sources for the claims it makes. There are two external links in the article. One links to a website which describes the grammar by Bartol Kašić as the first grammar of the Croatian language. Stankiewicz describes this grammar as follows, at page 77: “Croatian Grammars 17th-18th Century Cassius, Bartholomeus [Kašić, Bartol], Institutionum linguae illyricae libri duo, 2 vols., Rome 1604. K.’s grammar, written in Latin and modelled on popular Latin grammars (especially on those of Manuzio and Alvarez), deals with orthography, phonetics, declension (vol. I) and verbal forms (vol. II). K. aimed at the creation of a unified Croatian language, but in effect he codified čakavian with an admixture of štokavian elements. The grammar served as a base for later grammarians up to Appendini.”

The second link is to a Bulgarian history book. The page referred to in the article says that Petar Bogdan, apart from his native language {Bulgarian} mastered classical and contemporary languages - Illyrian {Croatian}, Old Bulgarian {Old Church Slavonic}, Russian, Vlach {Romanian}, Turkish and Italian. {The modern language names are in curly brackets.} It also says that Bogdan was held in high regard by the esteemed Croatian literary figure Rafael Levaković and that he collaborated with Levaković on editing and publishing of Illyrian liturgical books.

It is clear from the list of Croatian dictionaries and grammars in Wikipedia, and in Stankiewicz, that names formerly used as synonyms for the Croatian language were Illyrian, Dalmatian, Slavic (slovinski) etc. Other South Slavic languages were not called Illyrian, though they were called different names as well: eg. Carniolan and Windisch for Slovenian.

This article is nominated for deletion AfD. It had already been marked for deletion, but the deletion tag was removed within 7 days. The article can’t be fixed through normal editing. It may be possible to have a redirection, where Illyrian language redirects to the Croatian language, just like Bohemian language redirects to the Czech language article. However, this is not a solution here, because there was an ancient Illyrian language.


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:48, 8 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose, as pointed out in the articles talk, this a historical description of an obsolete term, if the article would be misleading, it could be cured by renaming, however some short article titles does not necessarily imply the case the nominator thinks, since it does not say South Slavic would be Illyrian, just refers to the historical association of it, etc. The article may be improved with sources, as for the reasons listed here we should not delete as well the Illyrian movement article, which was as well a South Slavic cultural movement (shall it be scientifically true or not the connection to Illyrians, on such ground many other issues may be debated or to be judged uncertain, but it does not mean these did not exist, e.g.).(KIENGIR (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2020 (UTC))
 * Oppose, if there are errors in the seminal page creation then these can be adjusted by anybody but the removal of the article would not he helpful. --Coldtrack (talk) 05:43, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Could the proposer clarify the policy grounds for the proposed deletion? It seems there are multiple POVs clashing here, but I don't think an AfD discussion is the right forum for settling such matters. The article certainly needs a thorough going-over, to remove the many instances of polemic or worse (and I am mindful here of the edit history and blocked status of the creating editor) as well as at least some of the unsupported statements, but that doesn't in and of itself necessitate deletion. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:43, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Croatia-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:00, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Yugoslavia-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:00, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks DoubleGrazing for the question on the policy grounds for the proposed deletion. Apologies in advance for the long answer, but it may make things clearer (I’ll also include it in the article’s talk page if you think that is the more appropriate location):

The reason for deletion is POV. Illyrian language was a name used to refer to the Croatian language in the 15-19th centuries (other names were used – refer to Stankiewicz pp. 77-93). The article makes unsourced claims in almost every sentence, and for that reason it cannot be improved. At best, it can be changed as a redirection to the Croatian language, but I consider that is not a good option because there was an ancient Illyrian language. The better option is for the Croatian language redirection to occur in the Illyrian language disambiguation page, and for this article to be deleted.

Going through each sentence of the article:

“The Illyrian language was a common name of the South Slavic languages…” Unsourced statement. POV. The standard reference, Stankiewicz, has Illyrian as referring to Croatian only; no other South Slavic language was referred to as Illyrian.

“… before the emergence of Slavistics and Cyrillo-Methodian Studies, and especially during the Ottoman period.” Unsourced statement.

“It was imposed as a common language as a result of Catholic propaganda in the Balkans in the 17th century.” Unsourced statement. POV. Illyrian was used as early as the 15th century to refer to Croatians and the Croatian language. This has nothing to do with Catholic propaganda. See the article talk’s page for more details.

“ In the 18th century it was replaced by the Slavonic-Serbian.[1]” The link, which talks about Petar Bogdan, does not support the statement. Illyrian was used to refer to the Croatian language until the second half of the 19th century (Stankiewcz). The Wikipedia article on Slavonic-Serbian correctly states that the Serbian recension of Church Slavonic was replaced in the 18th century by Slavonic-Serbian. Illyrian has nothing to do with this.

“Its base is Dubrovnik literature and Kotor literature from the Bugarštica,” Unsourced statement.

“and its first representative is Dinko Zlatarić.” Unsourced statement. The Wikipedia article on Dinko Zlatarić correctly states that he wrote in Croatian and Italian languages.

“Bartol Kašić can be considered the father of this language.” Unsourced statement. POV and possibly original research. Illyrian was used to refer to Croatians and the Croatian language before Bartol Kašić. Kašić was the first to write a grammar with the word Illyrian in the title, but as the second link states, that book was the first Croatian grammar book.

“In 1595, during the Long Turkish War, he became a Jesuit. From 1609 to 1633 he lived in Dubrovnik. In 1613-1614 and 1618-1619 he was on a mission in Bosnia, Serbia and Eastern Slavonia.” Unsourced statement. Irrelevant to the language, and already covered in the Wikipedia article on Bartol Kašić.

“In 1604 Institutionum linguae illyricae libri duo (the structure of the Illyrian language in two books; 200 pages) was published in Rome. Grammar is used as textbooks by Jesuits who have been sent on a mission in the Balkans. Bartol Kašić adopts the South Slavic dialect of grammar in Shtokavian, pointing out as such the subdialect of Dubrovnik that is everyday for him. [2]” This passage requires a bit of rewriting to make it grammatical and understandable. The link clearly states that this book was the first Croatian grammar book. Calling it a “South Slavic dialect of grammar in Shtokavian” is misleading and POV.

In summary, there is nothing to improve in the article. If the unsourced statements are removed, there will be nothing left.

Zixt2010 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:09, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Zixt2010. I'm no personal expert on South Slavs; my knowledge is better on North (or East/West) Slavs as I am Ukrainian from Lvov. Arguably one or the other depending whose narrative you adopt! :))) Either way, we did live together ancestrally in Austria-Hungary and we all at some point adopted Pan-Slavism. My point here is that this article can be salvaged by you contributing all of the above information with the sources. --Coldtrack (talk) 17:58, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Serbo-Croatian. The term Illyrian is already mentioned there in the section "Name". Or Croatian language, if other editors think this will be more apt. –Austronesier (talk) 08:45, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * On the Croatian language page I added the reference to Stankiewicz. Redirection to the Serbo-Croatian language is inappropriate in my view, because in Stankiewicz it is clear that the term Illyrian was not used to refer to the Serbian language. Zixt2010 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:28, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. It sems this is a dispute about what is the closest language group. It isnot the province of WP to dcide such things, and certainly not at AfD. Rather, expand the articles to include to various views and sources.  DGG ( talk ) 10:10, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.