Talk:Dubica, Bosnia-Herzegovina

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

Bosnia and Herzegovina High‑importance

	Bosnia and Herzegovina portal Dubica, Bosnia-Herzegovina is part of the WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Bosnia and Herzegovina on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Bosnia and HerzegovinaWikipedia:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaTemplate:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaBosnia and Herzegovina
High	This redirect has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

What's wrong with you people?

If you don't speak english properly, don't bother contributing at all. The article is a disaster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.7.166.170 (talk • contribs)

Just the opposite, please be bold. That is an official guideline here. We are a team, and if your English is poor but the content is good someone will fix it... and you can always ask for help if you'd like to speed up the process.

And ignore comments such as the above! It breaks many of our rules of course... but isn't that always the way? Those fondest of telling others what to do are the very ones least likely to follow reasonable instructions themselves. I also note that the IP concerned has been blocked for vandalism on three occasions. It may not be the same person of course. Andrewa (talk) 00:34, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Name change

Let's see, I think that it could remain Bosanska Dubica due to its official historic name. The municipality was changed to Kozarska Dubica after the devastating war. The same occurred with several other municipalities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, such as "Novi Grad", which was eventually changed back to Kostajnica. The people of Bosanska Dubica have formed petitions to ask for the official renaming. The link for this can be found at:

http://www.bosnjaci.net/bosdubica_peticija.php

Since you can read Bosnian there should not be any complications with the understanding of the text. The system was made to accept both Bosanska Dubica and Dubica since people use both. The name Kozarska Dubica is mostly (emphasis on most) used as a provacative statement. Now changing the name of the article would not lead to the end of this dispute. This is since the Serbian article named under Kozarska Dubica was not changed to Bosanska Dubica. The people of each nation view the city under a different name. I value your opinions but do not see the name change as a positive step for the article. --written by User:Kseferovic 9:30 CST United States, Chicago.

These arguments are ridiculous. Wikipedia is not about which name you like more, but which name is official and which is not. PANONIAN (talk) 22:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Central Election Commission of BiH official enough for you? http://www.izbori.ba/eng/default.asp?col=contactOik&opcina=8

Both names are official. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.255.108.145 (talk) 19:13, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Question

Dear user 81.93.93.189 (That is your Computer IP Address),

The petition list is still active, and is growing day by day. Also there are 1757 people who sign the petition as of midnight April 16, 2006.)

I do not think that the name should be changed. There are about 28,000 Serbs in Dubica, not all of them want to keep the name Kozarska Dubica.

Tell me where all of the nice, smart, and intellectual Serbs went, they all left Dubica because of the war. You really cannot find that many Serbs, who grew up in Bosanska Dubica, living there now. Many of the Serbs, living in Dubica now, are war refugees who came from Croatia after the Operation Storm (and other places).

Most of the Serbs who grew up in Dubica are friends with all, meaning they are friends with Bosniaks, Croatians, and Serbs. They feel that their home town is Bosanska Dubica. It was Dubica for hundreds of years, before that it was known as Turkish Dubica.

There are Serbs on the petition list that want the name changed, also please do not speak in the name of the whole town. This is not a political website, no one wants to argue or dispute.

(This is the same issue that occured in the town and municipality of Foča. Serbs called it Srbinje, but later it was changed back to Foča. The same will occur with Bosanska Dubica.)

SEVERAL FACTUAL EVIDENCES:

Have you noticed the offical stamp that the Municipality uses STATES Bosanska Dubica. Internationally Bosanska Dubica is recognized, NOT Kozarska Dubica. Look at Google Earth or any other satalite imagery website, they all have Bosanska Dubica written.

Also look at (Verizon Wireless.com -> Cell phone company) www.Verizonwireless.com, when you look at the reception for Bosnia and Herzegovina and find the town of Dubica, it says Bosanska Dubica.

Internationally BOSANSKA DUBICA is recognized, that is what matters.

Thank You, --Kseferovic 03:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At the present moment it is recognized only as Kozarska Dubica and Wikipedia should follow that. If name in the future change into something else, then name of the article should be changed too, but the current name of the article should reflect current official name. PANONIAN (talk) 22:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully Resolved Issue

Since, there was a great issue on what name to use for the article, I simply changed the article refrences (in the text) to the town/municipality, from Kozarska/Bosanska Dubica to ---> Dubica. This way we can all agree. The Bosnians and Croatians call the town Bosnaska Dubica (Bosnian Dubica), while the Serbs "counter-attack" by calling the town Kozarska Dubica. Kozarska Dubica gets its name from a close by mountain of Kozara. Both Bosanska Dubica and Kozarska Dubica are official city/municipality names (Example: You can write Bosanska or Kozarska Dubica while sending mail and it will arrive there, whether it be from Bosnia, Germany, or USA, both names are recognized). All three ethnicities agree upon the use of the name Dubica.

Hopefully this will end the name issue.

Kseferovic 21:11, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Name change

Please see:

http://www.vladars.net/cr/srpska/opstine.html

According to the official RS government web site, Kozarska Dubica is official name of the town. We do not have reason to use old name from SFRY. PANONIAN (talk) 22:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica is true.

Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica is the official Municipality name. I went to BiH this year and on the official ID CARDS and other official papers such as birth certificates for kids born now. The government papers state Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica. For the Town names it is separated Bosanska Dubica or Kozarska Dubica depending on the circumstances. Thanks and I am serious, Kseferovic 01:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Several Government/International Owned links:

Voting/Izbori Scroll down until you see Bosanska Dubica/Korzarska Dubica
UN owned Web Stie for help Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica
European Union held Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica
NATO held Web site Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica
Government Web site of munici. Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica

Official name is Kozarska Dubica

Most of those web sites you provided are not official ones, and even the last web site you provided mention name Kozarska Dubica (http://www.oscebih.org/democratization/municipalities.asp?d=3). The web site of the RS government (http://www.vladars.net/en/srpska/opstine.html) also mention it as Kozarska Dubica, so the name of the article should be changed to official town name - Kozarska Dubica. PANONIAN (talk) 16:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check this out

Here I have an official Bosnian and Herzegovinian Resident ID card issued by the BiH government. It states Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica. Both are valid in this case.

This is official

This should resolve all issues along with the links above "Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica is true.". Thank you, Kseferovic 01:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Documents in Bosnia-Herzegovina could be published in any of the 3 official languages. You asked that your documents are published in Bosnian language, thus name Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica is simply a name used for the town in Bosnian language. If you asked that your documents are published in Serbian, then name there would be only Kozarska Dubica written exclusively in Cyrillic script. Since all 3 official languages of Bosnia-Herzegovina are equal, and since Serbian language is main language spoken in this town, then name of the Wikipedia article should use name used in Serbian, and that is Kozarska Dubica. PANONIAN (talk) 12:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is official: This link shows the current name of all the cities and places in the Bosnian entity Republika Srpska presented by the government of the Republika Srpska. This list takes into account also the sentence of the Bosnian constitutional court regarding the name changes of cities and places in the Republika Srpska. This sentence considered all names including Srpski/Srpska/Srpsko as well as Srbinje as not valid. Hence, other changes as for Novi Grad and Kozarska Dubica were accepted by the court. So, Kozarska Dubica ist the current official name of the city and the lemma of this article should show this, too. --Mazbln 19:54, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the town name, but the municipality name is Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica. The article is on the municipality as a whole. Thanks, Vseferović 00:38, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Name (again)

Now, I looked more about this problem and although documents that User:Kseferovic showed do mention "Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica" name variant, this does not mean that town (or municipality) officially have double name, but that officially two different names are equaly used for it. Since Wikipedia does not support double naming of articles, I propose that name of this article is changed into one single name whether this name is "Kozarska Dubica" or "Bosanska Dubica". It should be chechked which of these two names is more often used and name of the article should be changed into it. PANONIAN (talk) 01:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name change voting

In accordance with my previous post I propose that name of this article is changed either to Kozarska Dubica either to Bosanska Dubica because double naming is against practice in Wikipedia. So, I propose fair voting that majority of users can decide which of the two names should be used. Please vote below and writte short explanation why you vote like that. PANONIAN (talk) 10:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article name should be Kozarska Dubica

PANONIAN (talk) 10:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC) - Although, government of Bosnia and Herzegovina officially use both names of the municipality, government of Republika Srpska use name Kozarska Dubica, which can be seen on official web site of the government of Republika Srpska: http://www.vladars.net/en/srpska/opstine.html Therefore, Kozarska Dubica seems to be most common name of the municipality. PANONIAN (talk) 10:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article name should be Bosanska Dubica

One can argue this both ways. Either you support the government variant of both names or the RS variant of Koz. I suggest we keep it this way or that we change the name to Dubica (Bosnia and Herzegovina). This is what has been placed on the border crossing of Dubica. The name on the border crossing used to be "Bosanska Dubica/Kozarska Dubica", however, it was changed to simply Dubica. No one can dispute the name Dubica. The only fair decision should be "Dubica" or the keeping of the current one since it is official as well. Vseferović 03:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Dubica (Bosnia and Herzegovina) is a good solution for the name. PANONIAN (talk) 17:37, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the issue of double naming exists for several towns (all in Republika Srpska AFAICT): Novi, Dubica, Šamac, Foča come to my mind, plus some "split" municipalities (Goražde, Vukosavlje). While the WP:NC(CN) may dictate some choices (Foča clearly outweights Srbinje--is the latter outlawed now?), most of the towns are too small to have a "common English name".
One way out is to apply the "South Tyrol solution" (I can dig out the discussion link if someone wants), where the Italian/German names were picked up by applying town's ethnic majority name (where WP:NC(CN)/WP:UE weren't applicable);the old titles were at Bozen-Bolzano and like (but see WP:LAME#Involving other languages). Of course, in this case, 1991 census results should be used (although it opens another Pandora's box of picking up the criteria, e.g. municipality or town's majority?)
Another way out is to find a "compromise" name like this one (although I don't quite like it for aesthetic reasons). I'm not actually proposing any of it, just thinking aloud...

And, btw, the Infobox RS/Infobox Bih municipality edit dispute is fairly childish... Reminds me of Serbian government... Duja► 09:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the people that live there use these names, the people of RS use these names, and these names are official where it counts - in the RS.--Hadžija 15:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

location

There is an Wikipedia sign "Bosanska Dubica" near the croatian town Nova Gradiška, which is wrong because Bosnska Dubica is 50 km more south-west, and in other country - Bosnia and Herzegovina 78.0.147.23 12:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now I understand what you are talking about. You mean the map coordinates are off, which you are completely right. I will try to find the correct coordinates as soon as possible. Thank you, Vseferović 04:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 July 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. No prejudice against a new RM with "Bosanska Dubica" as the proposed title. Jenks24 (talk) 14:03, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dubica, Bosnia-Herzegovina → Kozarska Dubica, Bosnia and Hezegovina – The official name of the place is "Kozarska Dubica". This can be easily verified by going to the official listing of all municipalities by the Agency of Statistics of Bosnia and Herzegovina (page 7), preliminary results of the latest census by the same federal institution here (on page 9). The local municipality's website also uses this name. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 04:00, 24 July 2015 (UTC) 188.246.72.98 (talk) 13:31, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per countless discussions above and evidence for the use of "Bosanska Dubica" in addition to or as alternative to Kozarska Dubica. The name Bosanska Dubica is also five times more common in literature than Kozarska Dubica (WP:Common name). The present name of the article is a sensible compromise. Surtsicna (talk) 13:41, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Yet there's 435,000 results for Bosanska Dubica on Google and 682,000 results for Kozarska Dubica. Naturally, the actual WP page on common names does say that tab "should be defaulted" to before the web results, but it certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't take that into consideration. Google and here Maps also list it on their maps service as "Kozarska Dubica". I have looked at the above discussions, but they're mostly from 2006-2007, and the Constitutional Court has since affirmed the position that double names can't be used in official sources, which is why newer neutral (and the Federal Statistics paper sure seems like a good neutral source as it's not written by any of the entities themselves separately) do use the new and official name. Should we compromise with the name of say, Salt Lake City because the prefix Great was removed and some people don't seem to like it? That's honestly what this feels like. We should use the official name. If the citizens want the prefix back, they can petition for it, and the minute it passes, I'll personally request a move to the new name the same way the name of Gornji Vakuf was officially changed and moved to Gornji Vakuf-Uskoplje (see history). If the government or stuff like Google for mapping, wanted to compromise, they could have easily named it Dubica or Kozarska-Bosanska Dubica, but they haven't, and I've provided the source for that. Besides, calling it Dubica could also potentially confuse with Hrvatska Dubica for readers.
Comment: Gbooks hits: "Bosanska Dubica" (229), "Kozarska Dubica" (108); Gscholar hits: "Bosanska Dubica" (191), "Kozarska Dubica" (123). Move to Bosanska Dubica without disambiguator. Clarify name in introduction or Name-section.--Zoupan 15:18, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The rationale for this move adds nothing to this ongoing discussion, being largely based on an appeal to the official name. That is of course of little relevance (if you find this surprising, as many do, then please read the policy as you were asked nicely to do before raising or voting on an RM, and the explanatory essay on this particular issue if you find the policy heavy going, as many do). Andrewa (talk) 00:58, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

HVO and Croatian army are 2 different stuff

Dubica was under siege of regular Croatian army, from Croatia. HVO never could get there, HVO was in other part of Bosnia, more Hercegovina. --PetarM (talk) 17:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting factual edits/history revisionism

Now, since I satisfied the two initial complainers (Azdaja and Surtsicna) who based their complaints on the lack of sources, what's the problem now? I understand now that other Wikipedia pages can't be referred to as a source, but changing that and having the information in the text in regard - what would possibly be a reasonable, additional reason to delete these facts? I want an answer from a factual perspective about the actual text that was undone, not a problem about references and other thing that are no problem fixing. Expecting an answer from Azdaja and Surtsicna at first hand to reach a consensus (which I'm not very convinced that we will reach based on their behavior, so I'm expecting a third party to take a decision in this matter to finally resolve this issue) Filipjako (talk) 23:44, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What? "complainers?" This is for everybody interested in the article, and not comprehensible. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]