Jump to content

Talk:Central Croatia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeCentral Croatia was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 14, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 22, 2012.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the region of Central Croatia comprises one third of the territory of Croatia, while generating more than half of the nation's GDP?

title changes

[edit]

This was called Central Croatia before it was moved to Croatia (region) and then to Croatia proper. The relevant discussion is at Talk:List of regions of Croatia#Croatian regions. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 10:05, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru I wanted to address you explicitly after the most recent move, but it looks like we already had this discussion so I'm just adding a courtesy ping :) --Joy (talk) 15:49, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Joy: thanks for the note, and Central Croatia seems fine to me. It seems to match the title used on croatian wiki as well hr:Središnja Hrvatska so that's OK. I just found the concept of "Croatia proper" rather odd-sounding, and not as far as I can tell supported by sources. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 18:12, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extent of Croatia proper

[edit]

Err. So I clicked on "Historical Dictionary of Croatia" by Robert Stallaerts in Google Books. The item "Croatia proper" is described as "the broader region around Zagreb and Varaždin", and the time is limited to "up until World War I", in the context of the Triune Kingdom. And then I clicked on Frucht's "Eastern Europe", or rather Mark Biondich's "Croatia" chapter, and it says Croatia proper is "composed of the areas known as Medjimurje, Hrvatsko Zagorje, Moslavina, Banija, Kordun, Lika, and Gorski Kotar". This source describes it as a modern-day region, but curiously omits the Littoral from it, and indeed doesn't seem to mention any of that area at all! Why aren't we using some better sources here? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 10:04, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Given that Stallerts states that Croatia is composed of "Croatia, Dalmatia, Istria, and Slavonia", we can assume with some degree of certainty that his quoted vague statement regarding the "wider area" refers to the historical extent of Croatia proper (as depicted in the map).
There is also no question whether the Croatian Littoral (as defined as on the map in the article) is in fact a part of Croatia proper: that's where it gets its historical name from. Biondich probably includes the "Croatian Littoral" under the heading of Lika and Gorski Kotar. Under the older, wider definition, they did/do include it. You could say that the Croatian Littoral is sort of an "overriding term" for parts of Lika and GK, its origin being simply "those parts of Croatia that are on the coast".
Regarding better sources, always a good idea, but imo it must be kept in mind that we don't have any official boundaries here. "Dalmatia", "Salvonia", "Croatia proper" are all vague terms. And so were Central Croatia et al., as different sources provided different schemes. We shouldn't expect to precisely define these regions down to every detail. We're not on solid ground even now, with the "anchors" of Slavonia and Dalmatia to help us out. -- Director (talk) 10:29, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What I'm saying is, if we're being so lax with the choice and interpretation of sources, this will not lead to more quality articles/arguments. And lo and behold, your merge has been reverted... --Joy [shallot] (talk) 06:56, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that IvanOS has reverted something is hardly a thing to be surprised at, or interpreted as being caused by anything other than groundless POV-pushing. Wandering about and mindlessly revert-warring for various perceived right-wing Croatian-nationalist causes is apparently his main function on the project. But I don't think I have to tell you that.
Look, I don't pretend the current division is perfect, but so far as I myself can see, its the best we can possibly have given the circumstances. Asking for sources for the previous organization was the main point of my thread back there: no sources were provided, not really. And even if we assume the unsourced equivalency of Slavonia with "Eastern Croatia" and Dalmatia with the "Southern Croatian Littoral" (which is I think rubbished by the massive difference in extent as discovered in the thread below, and by the region of the "Central Littoral"), even if take it for granted - only one old source from 50 years ago has been brought up in support of that division. And even if we implement it we still mix up two different divisions of the country: geomorphological and historical - and then we would also require a pointless CONTENTFORK in the shape of the "Northern Croatian Littoral" duplicate article in order to actually organize coverage of the country that way. It gives me a headache.
This at least makes sense on some level. We have three decent-quality articles effectively covering the country, as opposed to five or even seven. We don't have any outright duplicates or WP:OVERLAP. And at the end of the day - our country really isn't that big.. NUTS-2 gives it two measly regions. -- Director (talk) 07:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The new organisational scheme is much better than the previous one, and much more intuitive. RGloucester — ☎ 13:27, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Virovitica, Pakrac

[edit]

I don't believe I've ever seen Virovitica or Pakrac described as not Slavonia. What is the source for this part of the map? Is it the one in the caption of the analogous map at Slavonia:

Milan Ilić (June 2001). "System of suburban bus service in Central Croatia". Hrvatski geografski glasnik. 63 (1). Croatian Geographic Society: 1–14. ISSN 1331-5854. Retrieved 2 April 2012.

I've skimmed it and it says on p.2 that it defines Central Croatia "in functional sense" as the Zagreb macroregion. It does not include Mountainous Croatia or the Croatian Littoral, but does include the areas of the SFRY municipalities of Virovitica and Pakrac. It seems to be a work primarily oriented towards transportation issues.

Given that this simply isn't an authoritative work on a geographic and historic regional delineation, I don't believe we should just leave it at this. There can be a discussion in the article of the varying definitions, and it can be mentioned, but leaving it standalone gives it undue weight. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 10:21, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As I am not familiar with the exact westward extent of Slavonia, I followed Tomboe's map in that respect. But (after looking at some historical maps) it also occurred to me that he may have taken a chuck out of Slavonia there, and I was wondering whether I should do away with the striped area.
At this point it seems to me that the striped area represents the difference between the term "Central Croatia" and Croatia proper, with the former encroaching on what is generally regarded as Slavonia. -- Director (talk) 10:29, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've corrected the maps accordingly. -- Director (talk) 11:22, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure we're on the same page here. If a map shows strictly "Croatia proper", it should not depend on modern-day counties. If Lika is Croatia proper, then Gračac is Croatia proper. If Virovitica etc isn't Croatia proper, then it stays out of the map. If a map shows both "Croatia proper" and "Central Croatia", then it can definitely include varieties. Because you merged the articles, you should also merge the maps or provide both maps to clarify what is meant by what. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 12:17, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I too thought that the Croatia/Slavonia striped area represented the difference between county and historical boundaries, as with Gracac. Upon closer inspection, however, it seems that it instead represents the difference between the boundaries of "Central Croatia" and Croatia proper with Slavonia. That is to say, while Dalmatia is variously described today as including Gracac, Croatia proper is not described as extending that far east - but Central Croatia. -- Director (talk) 16:06, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I hope I don't have to tell you that importing the dubious undue-weight Gračac issue from Dalmatia into another article is unhelpful, it's just muddying the water further in here. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 06:59, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are we talking about Gracac or the Slavonian border here? That stupid "four counties definition" has been sourced, and in spite of my repeated requests, I've not seen any sources to show its undue weight. I really can't express how little I care for whether Gracac is actually a "part of Dalmatia".. All I'm trying to do is visually represent the various views expressed in references regarding these regions.
Re the Slavonian boundary, as I said, that striped area is basically how far "Central Croatia" encroaches on Slavonia. Have a look at the map and you'll see, as I did, that it doesn't correspond to county borders (as in some equivalent of the Dalmatian "four counties defintion" conflicting with traditional perception). If we don't use the term I don't see the need for any depiction. -- Director (talk) 07:18, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Croatia proper. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Croatia proper. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:49, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Croatia proper. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:48, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

mountain list on a bit of a shaky ground

[edit]

Talk:List of mountains in Croatia#Statistical Yearbook on mountains is a problem that applies here, too. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:56, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Central_Croatia&oldid=1248866200"