Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Triune Kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia

Incredible. Argumentation like "Kebeta, Kubura and SpeedyGonsales do not have an argument. All their posts simply refer to the usage of the term "Triune Kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia"." functions here? You simply say "they don't have an argument" and that's your argumentation???? "Simply refer" is nothing? What? Are we going to take this kind of argumentation as valid one?? Do you know what you've just written? That it doesn't matter if persons A, B and C are on the list for the death sentence, "it refers only to A and B, that death sentence doesn't refer to C because it simply refers and nothing more". Tell that to C. If something says in the legal document, than it says that. You cannot say "it just writes there, it simply refers, but nothing more". Tell that to bank officer when you're next in the line of loan promissors. Are we going to allow pushing of POV through evading of discussion on the article talkpages and then skipping that step with direct proposing of deleting, and then, on the AfD, with ordinary majority of votes allow POV-pushers to push their unfounded claims? I can't believe how shallow your approach was. Nagodba wasn't "an irredentist claim". That was a legal document, not some kind of secret agreement signed without knowing of Habsburg authorities, not some document signed by some unimportant persons (not some street conspiracy of drunkmen). Habsburg wouldn't allow "irredentist" claims and unfounded claims that deal with Austrian part of the Monarchy just like that. Nagodba explicitly dealt with part of Monarchy that was in Austrian part. Although medieval Croatian Kingdom was administratively separated that way in two parts, that legal document reconfirmed the unity of that Kingdom. If you think that "rights" are nothing, tell that to shareholders when you try to deny them their rights, since these are "just some virtual and out-of-reality stuff". Nagodba was reconfirmation of previous documents in Habsburg Monarchy that were confirming the unity of these Croatian lands. When in 1790 Croatian Diet decided to transfer its powers to Hungarian Diet, that was conditioned and with temporal limits: "until the return of areas of Croatia, that today are under the rule Republic of Venice and Ottoman Empire". This wasn't an irredentist claim. They obviously never recognized Ottoman rights to those lands (maybe you pushed me by force out of my house, but that doesn't mean that my ownership has ceased. It's always mine.). In 1867 Francis Joseph I gave "zavjernica" (I don't know for English iuridic term) in which was emphasised that all lands that Monarchy manages to return 'll be returned back to Hungary and its "sister Kingdoms" (that means, Croatia). Reference: Stjepan Matković: Aneksijska kriza, Hrvatska revija br.1/2009., str. 118. I owe you the source for the conditions that Habsburgs accepted when Croatian Diet decided to take Habsburgs as the kings. Interesting thing was the timing of this AfD. Exactly when Wikipedia in Croatian had elections of admins, and when there was lot of patrolling tasks to be done, and voting had to be monitored, so the major Croatian contributors on en.wiki weren't able to answer here, since they were busy on that. I hardly managed to post one answer. And then user DIREKTOR took the opportunity. Kubura (talk) 02:54, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * What are you doing?? Don't recreate deleted pages with this nonsense... -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 08:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)