Jump to content

Talk:Persecution of Croats in Serbia during the Yugoslav Wars

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Expulsions in Hrtkovci)

Part of War in Croatia or not?

[edit]

I personally agree that it was. Let's browse through the logic here: if we agree that it was part of the Yugoslav Wars (which it was, since there is an ICTY indictment covering the case), then we should identify which of the four wars if refers to. It certainly was not part of War in Kosovo or Slovenia, not even Bosnia. Since incoming Serb refugees were coming from Croatia, they resented Croats due to the war situation there, and Croats from Hrtkovci fled to find new homes in Croatia, then the conclusion is obvious.--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you put it this way then this event was not part of any war at all. It was just an isolated case of ethnic violence that was not technically part of any war. Therefore, both, wrong template and wrong category should be removed. PANONIAN 17:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And proof for validity of this view is fact that full name of International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia is "The International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991". So, there is no word "war" in name of this tribunal which clearly imply that tribunal does not deal with "war crimes", but with "Violations of International Humanitarian Law", which is something very different. PANONIAN 17:15, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Aaaah, but it is hardly isolated when the indictment even mentions Ruma and other places in Vojvodina where similar cases were reported. By that logic, Sremska Mitrovica camp and Begejci camp were also "tehnically not part" of any war since they were so "far away" from the conflicts. By the way, International humanitarian law refers to laws and customs of war or the law of armed conflict, which means that this event isn't listed by the ICTY by accident. Why do you think Milan Lukić wasn't for example indicted for a racket, too?
Anyway, the two of us can not reach a consensus over this matter and thus need at least more people to express their opinion about this.--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 18:36, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We speak here about events in Hrtkovci. I will deal with camps articles in proper time. It cannot be disputed that events in Hrtkovci are only an example of civilian riots that are distantly related to war in Croatia, but certainly not part of it. There was no any war in the territory of Vojvodina in 1991-1992 and claims that there was are unacceptable. Anyway, do you have an reliable source that claim that event in Hrtkovci was part of war in Croatia or it is just your own opinion? Also, it is interesting that some Croatian users are pushing term "Croatian war for independence" (which in fact was "Croatian war against independence of RSK") and I really do not see by which logic one "war for independence" could be fought in the territory of another country? Or perhaps somebody thinks that Vojvodinian Syrmia is an "Croatian land"? To put it this way: Vojvodinian Syrmia is not part of Croatia and events that happened on its soil were not part of any "Croatian war". Also, the separation between some "wars" in former Yugoslavia is rather philosophical than historical: wars in Croatia and Bosnia are related one to another to such extent that they could be rather seen as one single Serb-Croat-Bosniak war. The Croatian army that allegedly "fought for independence" also participated in Bosnian war and fought against army of Republika Srpska and against army of the Republic of Western Bosnia (I just wonder how is that connected to Croatian independence?). Anyway, it cannot be disputed that there was no any war on Vojvodinian soil in 1991-1992. Civilian riots and clashes are not "wars". In recent history, we have examples of such riots in Kosovo and Xinjiang, but they are not classified as "wars". Finally, if International humanitarian law deal with war events only (I will explore this question further) then Hrtkovci case is out of jurisdiction of that court and prosecutors abused their own position in this case (Šešelj is not convicted for that - he is only accused and charges are not same as convictions). PANONIAN 06:44, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go again with the "controversial" debate over the "Croatian War of Independence", when even Amnesty International is using the term[1]. It is questionable if it was "Croatian war against independence of RSK" when it was established that Milan Martic wanted that RSK unites itself with RS and Serbia ([2]), thus it is far more correct to call it "Croatian war against Greater Serbia". But, this is all off-topic. If you want these kind of debates, go to the Croatian War of Independence talk page. Let's deal with this issue.

I presented you the examples of Sremska Mitrovica camp, Stajicevo camp, Begejci camp and others to prove that detention camps existed on the territory of Vojvodina, where Croat prisoners of war were deported. As you can see, Croatian War was brought to Vojvodina by Serbia itself. The same goes with Hrtkovci, sources for its link with the Croatian War are already in the article: The Independent: "In Hrtkovci, groups of radicalised Serbs, many of them fighters from Croatia, invaded the village this spring and started expelling local residents...The tactics of the Hrtkovci activists echo the opening phase of the war in Croatia last year, when the seizure of villages by groups of well-armed Serbian activists touched off a bloody...".--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 07:57, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have time to argue with you about all issues related to war in Croatia and I am also not interested to (you are free to believe in what ever fairy tale you want). However, these are important issues related to this subject: such camps that you speak about are something completely different from events in Hrtkovci. Camps were held by the authorities, while what happened in Hrtkovci was started by civilians. Info that some of these civilians came from Croatia where they were fighters does not change the fact that they were just civilians in Serbia. Krajina was considered a separate country and members of Krajina armed forces did not walked through Serbia with their arms (Only members of Yugoslav army and Serbian police were able to do that according to the law). So, these "fighters from Croatia" were only civilians and refugees in Serbia (you practically claiming that members of Krajina army invaded Serbia and attacked Serbian citizens in an village located far from Serbian border. I am sorry, but that is simply ridiculous). Also, the existence of the mentioned camps is not an evidence that there was war in Vojvodina in 1991-1992. Stalin deported many war prisoners to camps in Syberia but that does not mean that there was a war in Syberia. Finally, the opinion of one populist journalist who thinks that event in Hrtkovci is similar to "opening phase of the war in Croatia" is not proof for anything. This journalist even did not knew that Hrtkovci had population of 2,684 in 1991 and therefore he wrote that 5,000 Croats lived in the village (How 5,000 Croats could live in a village with population of 2,684?). This journalist obviously had problem even with elementary school maths, not to mention more advanced subjects. PANONIAN 14:17, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's particularly useful to elevate the status of the Hrtkovci incidents to the level of a standalone 'element' or 'field' of war, because the matter is simply not straightforward like that. Similarly, it was pointless to elevate the rioting in Zadar in May 1991 to a similar status, and we moved it to the Human rights in Croatia article where it makes more sense. It would make sense to move this content to Human rights in Serbia, and indeed elaborate the whole affair, because it doesn't seem likely to me that Hrtkovci was the one single place where a non-trivial amount of people decided it was safer to move rather than risk dealing with Šešelj &co. (If it was, treating it as a wholly isolated incident would actually have more sense.) Then the matter of categorization of this title (redirect) under the Yugoslav war categories or more specific Croatian war categories becomes far less relevant. At the same time, because of clearly different circumstances and effective jurisdictions between Croatia, BiH and Serbia at the time, I don't see any problem describing each set of hostilities in its own context. Some actors did at times cross to different locales, but that kind of interaction is suitable for describing in the all-encompassing Yugoslav wars article. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 12:39, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hrtkovci, Nikinci and Platičevo (Persecution of Croats in Serbia)

[edit]

Niknci Hrtkovci and two adjacent villages located 15 kilometers south of Ruma, before the ethnic cleansing largely populated by Croats. Attacks against the Croats in the two villages began killing Mijat Stefanac in Hrtkovci, the time has come and the local parish priest Nikola Kraljevic who managed to escape to save the corn. In the assembly of citizens, in the presence of Vojislav Seselj officially prioglašeno expel non-Serb citizens of Vojvodina. This is done by reading the list of "undesirable" residents of Croats, who are under particular threat izbijeglica, coming mainly from the Croatian war-affected areas, soon had to move out. Twenty families of Croatian nationality was expelled from their homes. Local government headed by Ostoja Sibinčićem then changed the name of the village Srbislavci. Serbs then shimmed the fire in the parish church of sv. Clement, throwing grenades at the home and garden Croats Nikinci, where he mined and the church. Most of the expelled Croats settled in Zagreb, 130 families in the Tower of Pozega 72 families, Slatina 54, Pozega 21, and has Hrtkovčana in Sisak and Rijeka Ivanjoj Cabuna by 11 families, Jaksic, Rovinj and Zapresic at 10 and even more so in the 70 - towns and villages. [3]Glas KoncilaHrvatska Riječ

Ethnic cleansing in Vojvodina were also in Starčevo, Ruma, Vajska, Petrovaradin, Novi Slankamen, Stari Slankamen, Gibarac (91,43% Croat 1991., 2001. 7,85%), Kukujevci, Šid, Sremska Mitrovica, Zemun, Novi Beograd, Platičevo, Golubinci, Novi Banovci, Ruma, Beška, Ljuba, Batrovci, Sot ... Need article Ethnic cleansing in Vojvodina. (Sorry for the bad english:))--Sokac121 (talk) 20:19, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There was no ethnic cleansing in Vojvodina. If you tried to check actual sources, you would see that largest number of people who left from Vojvodina in 1990s were in fact Serbs. Aside from these events in Hrtkovci, people in other parts of Vojvodina left the region because of economic reasons (and people leaving Vojvodina today because of these same reasons and largest number of people who leaving Vojvodina are and were Serbs). The reason why ethnic composition of some settlements changed is the fact that some Serb refugees and Serbs from southern parts of Serbia were settled in Vojvodina. These are well known patterns of economical migrations - economy in southern Serbia is in much worse condition, so inhabitants of southern Serbia are coming to Vojvodina serarching for job, while inhabitants of Vojvodina are emigrating to European Union, USA or Canada also searching for jobs. You simply have no evidence that there was an "ethnic cleansing" in settlements that you listed. As for Gibarac, you are right that there was an notable change between Croat and Serb populations in that village, but we cannot speculate what happened there if we do not see some reliable source that clarify this. If events in Gibarac were similar to those in Hrtkovci, then these events could be mentioned in some article, but certainly not in one named "Ethnic cleansing in Vojvodina" since that title have clear propagandist anti-Vojvodinian attitude and it is example of original research (and why using name "Vojvodina" instead "Syrmia", "Serbia" or "FR Yugoslavia"?). I believe that better solution would be that we rename "Expulsions in Hrtkovci" article to something like "Expulsions of Croats from Serbia" (i.e. if there is some sourced evidence that these expulsions occurred anywhere else instead in Hrtkovci). PANONIAN 08:08, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic priests were particularly targeted. Pastor Kraljević Nikola was one day nearly beaten to death, from which it is not recovered, while the churches podmetani fires. During the October 1990. Planted the mine device to the Franciscan monastery and church in Bac in, or a cultural monument under state protection. There followed then attack with explosives on the church and rectory in Subotica, Šid, Novi Slankamen, Hrtkovci, Novi Banovci, Ruma, Nikinci, Morović, Gibarc, Erdevik, Nestin, Kukujevci, Sot, Sremska Mitrovica, Sremska Kamenica, Surcin and Vasic. In these attacks, the churches have suffered various damage, and most victims were church Vašica, which was razed to the ground. Dnevni list Danas Serbian sources

The attacks on the Croats, the destruction of religious buildings, death threats, shooting at houses, tens of thousands of expelled Croats perfect example of ethnic cleansing in Vojvodina.--Sokac121 (talk) 10:21, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, attacks on some people are not same as "ethnic cleansing". You should see dictionary entry for term "ethnic cleansing". Second, not all of the places that you mentioned are in Vojvodina (try to read where Surčin is located). Clearly, Vojvodina cannot be used as name of the area where these events happened. PANONIAN 12:17, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Surčin is located in the eastern Syrmia region. Most of Syrmia is located in the Srem and South Bačka districts of Serbia's Autonomous Province of Vojvodina. Smaller part of the region around Novi Beograd, Zemun, and Surčin belongs to the City of Belgrade. What condition was 1990-1995?

As will be called the article "attacks on some people" in Vojvodina? Expulsions Croats from Vojvodina maybe?--Sokac121 (talk) 12:29, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Surčin and Zemun are parts of Belgrade since 1945. Therefore, I would not object that you rename this article to "Expulsions of Croats from Serbia". PANONIAN 17:34, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
95% of events related to Vojvodina. A good and this Expulsions of Croats from Serbia--Sokac121 (talk) 08:55, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So, we then agree about title "Expulsions of Croats from Serbia"? Also, I think that it is better that article "Expulsions in Hrtkovci" is renamed to "Expulsions of Croats from Serbia" and expanded with info about other settlements instead that we create new article for that. PANONIAN 14:18, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like Hrtkovci was the most vivid example, but the pattern existed in other villages. Yet, I'm a bit weary of Expulsions of Croats from Serbia because it's a very generic title, and it's a slippery slope - outright expulsion may not have happened everywhere so the title might seem too broad and slanted. Would 1992 persecution of Croats in Serbia work? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 20:49, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
One source mentions a 1995 murder. Was this sufficient for an 'aftermath' section or should the title cover the entire period? "...during the war in Croatia"? "...during the Yugoslav Wars"? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 20:54, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think that "Persecution of Croats in Serbia during the Yugoslav Wars" would be the best choice. PANONIAN 06:03, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Persecution of Croats in Serbia during the war in Croatia, is a better choice. The expulsion was connected with the war in Croatia. For me a better name Expulsions of Croats from Serbia

President Josipovic yesterday visited Kukujevci 1991. 89.07% Croat, 2001. 3.19%, 1800 expelled Croats and damaged the Catholic Church. --Sokac121 (talk) 10:00, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Persecution of Croats in Serbia during the war in Croatia is OK too. Any of the 3 last proposals are acceptable. PANONIAN 17:43, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How is this entire thing not original research?
If this thing may stay here then we could make Persecution of Serbs in Croatia during the war in Croatia , yes? (LAz17 (talk) 22:25, 13 September 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
Various sources exist that describe the exact same matter (some in much harsher words), including ICTY proceedings, so it's simply not original. Did you try reading the linked sources? Regarding the "counter" article, that kind of an argument fails WP:OTHERSTUFF, and there's already Murder of the Zec family etc, and it's a failure to assume good faith. (I will assume this was just a knee-jerk reaction.) --Joy [shallot] (talk) 22:40, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To me it seems that this article is just something of some angry croatian amassing what sources they could find. That is original research, even though it's cited. Right? (LAz17 (talk) 20:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
If the sources were all telling various different stories, details of which were then combined into a single story just for the purpose of the article and without coherent basis in those sources, then that would be a violation of WP:SYNTH (part of the policy against original research). This, however, is not - read the linked articles and you will see that they're on topic, they talk specifically of the same set of events, covering them in a reasonable amount of detail, and in the same context as this article. I re-checked the verbiage and found that for example The Independent article literally used the phrase 'persecution of local Croats' in reference to these events.
Now, it could be that the demonstrated amount of coverage isn't sufficiently significant for a standalone article, which would not be a violation of the policy on original research, but of the general notability guideline. I already noted above that we could resolve that by merging into a more general article, but nobody seemed to pay attention. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 22:43, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I originally wrote only about the expulsions in Hrtkovci. Someone then changed it into Persecution of Croats in Vojvodina during the war in Croatia, which makes it much broader than it was. Now, I am not trying to be disrespectful towards Serbia or anything, but I think it warrants a stand-alone article, as there are other similar examples already here on Wikipedia, such as Persecution of Serbs and other non-Albanians in Kosovo or expulsions of Germans.--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 17:31, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I read both of Joy's comments above and I agree. I'm not really sure if the expulsion in Hrtkovci merits a standalone article, but on the other hand I don't know what would be the proper merge target for it. In any case, if it stays as it is, it should be renamed as all such articles must be defined in time and space in article titles. For comparison, Expulsion of Germans is actually titled "Flight and expulsion of Germans (1944–1950)" and the Persecution of Serbs and other non-Albanians in Kosovo is not really a measure of anything since it has a host of its own problems (for starters, I don't see anyone other than Serbs mentioned in the article body and even though the article itself defines its scope as describing events during the 1998-99 Kosovo War, the title suggests otherwise). Also, there's very little to suggest that there was persecution in other places in Vojvodina - if there was, it needs to be evidenced better. For the time being I suggest this article to be moved to Persecution of Croats in Vojvodina (1991–1992) or Expulsion of Croats from Vojvodina (1991–1992) or maybe Flight of Croats from Vojvodina (1991–1992). Timbouctou (talk) 17:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As I already pointed out, usage of term "Vojvodina" is incorrect since these events also happened in some parts of Syrmia that are not part of Vojvodina (Sokac121 already said that this also happened in Zemun, Novi Beograd, etc - these places are not part of Vojvodina). Also, Vojvodina is not country but only a province and I see no reason why usage of name of a province would be "better" than usage of a name of country (countries are primary geographic locations). Third, do you suggest that Vojvodinian provincial government participated in persecution of Croats and that these things were done in name of Vojvodina? Members of SRS party that done these things in fact had "abolishment of Vojvodina" among their political goals, so usage of name "Vojvodina" in the title of this article is far from appropriate since it imply that these things were done "in name of Vojvodina" or "by Vojvodinian government" and we all know that it is not correct. PANONIAN 18:48, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
1. Fine, than it shouldn't be Vojvodina, but Serbia. 2. That's ridiculous and has nothing to do with the topic. The article's scope needs to be defined geographically and it doesn't make an iota of difference whether Vojvodina is a province, a municipality or an empire. Do you also suggest that Persecution of Serbs and other non-Albanians in Kosovo should be moved to Persecution of Serbs in Serbia? That might be fun (I'd certainly vote for it). 3. I couldn't care less "in whose name" anything was done at any place at any time in history. What I am concerned is what happened, where it happened and when it happened and if somebody reported it. You are reading too much into it. Timbouctou (talk) 19:14, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Kosovo is not appropriate example because its status inside or outside Serbia is disputed - status of Vojvodina is not even similar to that. And if we really want to determine "where" this happened then "Vojvodina" is a wrong answer. PANONIAN 19:27, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, but was Kosovo's status disputed in 1998-99? Was it not undisputedly part of Serbia back then? Timbouctou (talk) 19:31, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That article speaks about persecutions of Serbs in Kosovo from 1998 to 2011 and status of Kosovo was/is clearly disputed in part of that period. If I would care about Kosovo-related articles then I would say that title "Persecutions of Serbs in Serbia" is not inaccurate at all since Serbs are also persecuted in other parts of Serbia, see: http://www.rtv.rs/sr_lat/hronika/pretuceni-srpski-mladici-u-temerinu-_273528.html PANONIAN 19:42, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Using that logic, if a Serbian happened to get mugged in Tokio, you'd diligently propose merging it all into Persecution of Serbs on planet Earth? Timbouctou (talk) 16:56, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That is again not proper example. One killed Serb in Tokio would not mean that Serbs are persecuted in Japan. You cannot compare this with Yugoslav wars and cases of ethnic persecutions in former Yugoslavia which were made with certain political aims. PANONIAN 08:47, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if you want sources, this source clearly mention that Surčin was among places where these events happened. This place is not part of Vojvodina - it is part of the city of Belgrade since 1945. PANONIAN 19:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article you linked talks about the topic directly and calls these events collectively:
  • "progon građana hrvatske nacionalnosti iz Vojvodine"
  • "proterivanje Hrvata iz Vojvodine" and
  • "dešavanja sa vojvođanskim Hrvatima"
Sorry but this nails it for me and unless you can find sources calling this anything else your argument is simple OR. Timbouctou (talk) 19:28, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So? Term used by one journalist does not prove anything. That journalist perhaps did not knew that some of these places are not in Vojvodina. If we see that he made mistake we have obligation to correct that mistake. PANONIAN 19:33, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but as you very well know we depend on what reliable sources say when determining article titles. The article you linked talks about the topic directly and in detail and mentions Vojvodina or Vojvodna Croats at least a dozen times, while Serbia is mentioned maybe once. Arguing that it's "just one journalist" is ridiculous. Timbouctou (talk) 19:40, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
According to all reliable sources, Surčin is not in Vojvodina. Do you suggest that we should base this article on a single source and that we should ignore all other sources? PANONIAN 19:47, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What I suggest is that you start producing sources supporting your ideas that the events this article describes are not collectively defined as related to Vojvodina. So far you haven't produced a single one which would agree with you, and you know what we do with OR on Wikipedia. We ignore it. Timbouctou (talk) 19:51, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
All right, no problem. Here it is: http://topforumhr.com/index.php?page=news&op=readNews&id=29500&title=%C5%A0e%C5%A1elj-Htio-sam-protjerati-Hrvate-iz-Srbije (Vojislav Šešelj himself admitted that he wanted to expel Croats "from Serbia" and not "from Vojvodina"). PANONIAN 19:54, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Really PANNONIAN? That's the best you can do? Quoting Vojislav Šešelj's rants? In his reply to an undisclosed question so we do not even know what he was referring to? This is ridiculous. Timbouctou (talk) 20:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please. The "best I can do" usually come in first half of the day (assuming that I slept more than 8 hours). Anyway, here are some other sources: "rekao je Sanader, da bi nešto kasnije napomenuo da se mora razgovarati i o Hrvatima koji su izbegli iz Srbije", "Nije riječ samo o Hrvatima koji su izbjegli iz Srbije", "Hrvati prognani iz Srbije", "Otkako ste prije sedamnaest godina prognani iz Srbije, iz Beograda, živite u Hrvatskoj. Zašto ste morali iz Beograda?", "i jasno zahteva da se u napuštene kuće nasele Hrvati koji su proterani iz BiH i Srbije". It is clearly not "an original research" and I do not see any logical reason why would you insist that term "Vojvodina" is used here instead. PANONIAN 21:15, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You don't see any "logical reason" eh? Maybe logic works differently in Vojvodina then:
As for your "sources" - your first link comes from an article originally published by srpskadijaspora.info, who used the phrase "Hrvati izbegli iz Srbije" themselves (I wonder why). Your second link is from Radio Slobodna Evropa which mentions Vojvodina 26 times (I counted) and in which Bojan Pajtić explicitly says " Iz Vojvodine je otišlo oko tridesetak hiljada Hrvata. Nije bilo većeg odliva hrvatskog stanovništva sa područja Podunavlja i severne Bačke, ali je izuzetno mnogo Hrvata otišlo iz Srema." Your fourth link is a blog by don Anđelko Kaćunko, a crackpot priest, who interviewed a Croat painter. Not exactly reliable by anyone's standards is it. Also, the man lived in Belgrade, unlike the other 30 or 40 thousand people our article is talking about. Timbouctou (talk) 22:38, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That is not the point. It is undoubtedly proved that Croats also left from parts of Serbia that are not in Vojvodina, including Belgrade, and therefore "Vojvodina" is simply not proper description for this. Or you suggest that we create separate article for "Persecution of Croats from Central Serbia"? Because of some reason you pushing an anti-Vojvodinian POV here and that is simply unacceptable - it violates NPOV policy of Wikipedia. In fact, following your twisted logic, we can use title "Persecution of Croats in Syrmia" because "most of these events happened in Syrmia". I repeat that Vojvodinan government had nothing to do with this, that people who done that were acting "in the name of Serbia" and not "in the name of Vojvodina", that they were also anti-Vojvodinian and that they had "abolishment of Vojvodina" among their goals. These are very valid points, so please do not try to use POV ways to present Vojvodina "in bad light" (what you doing is same as attempt of some Bosniak nationalists to present "Republika Srpska" as "genocidal creation"). Vojvodinian government always respected human and minority rigts, so let not play these games, OK? PANONIAN 08:08, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, what is the point of 15 external links? Do you think that this is some sort of game and who post more links he wins? If I post 16 links then I will win I suppose? PANONIAN 08:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please remember WP:NOTFORUM and consult WP:TITLE before commenting further. In particular, pay attention to the sentence at WP:TITLE which reads "An article title is a convenient label for the article, which distinguishes it from other articles. It need not be the name of the subject; many article titles are descriptions of the subject." As demonstrated by 15 links above and the 1 link you posted earlier, this is the description widely used for the topic of the article (actually it's 17+1 because the last one comes from three different English-language sources). As for your remarks about "my twisted logic" - read upon WP:CIVIL. The only twisted thing here is you finding a connection where nobody else sees one. Not a single source above mentions Vojvodina government and yet they all mention Vojvodina (including the direct quote by the head of the Vojvodina government himself). You seem to have some serious WP:OWN issues here. If you can find 16 sources talking about the events differently then produce them, otherwise stop wasting my time. Timbouctou (talk) 08:52, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You was the first one who spoke against my logic. I really do not understand this: if somebody tell you that something is POV then you should try to work with others to reach NPOV and accurate solution, right? Instead, you continuing to push that POV. Why? Is there any reason why current title would be wrong or POV? By the way, I can find 19 sources that using term "Serbia", but what would be point - I told you already that this is not game of who will post more sources. You firstly said that I have no sources at all and I presented sources, so you simply have no argument now. PANONIAN 09:50, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What you presented was random results you took from a Google search, including lunatics like Šešelj and Kaćunko and the misrepresented quote by Ivo Sanader. I provided quotes in Croatian, Serbian and English language, coupled with sources which include several daily newspapers, news agencies and a few scholarly works. You my friend have yet to grasp the way Wikipeda works if you think what you presented was a strong case. I will file a formal request at WP:REQMOVE because your prejudice makes you impossible to work with. You failed to convince me, good luck with convincing others. Timbouctou (talk) 10:12, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is that so? I only tried to clean this article from anti-Vojvodinian propaganda and to make it NPOV in relation to Vojvodina. However, even in its current form, title is not cleansed from anti-Serbian propaganda, so perhaps I will propose that this article is merged with Serbia in the Yugoslav Wars since it is only part of that issue. And all users who edit Wikipedia in good faith and who do not have political agenda to push will find that "work with me" could be very constructive. PANONIAN 11:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I never heard of "anti-Vojvodinian propaganda". Would you care to elaborate on that phenomenon because frankly you sound quite paranoid. And I'll oppose your merge proposal for one - you made me dig for sources and I happened to stumble into quite a few of them, making me believe that this topic merits a standalone article, probably titled Expulsion of Croats from Vojvodina (1991–1995). Cheers. Timbouctou (talk) 16:56, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the fact that "you never heard" about something is not an evidence that "something does not exist". Anyway, I do not want to waste my time discussing with you political issues, so I will focus my answer on simple and relevant questions. since there is no doubt that these events also occurred in Zemun, Novi Beograd and Surčin (which obviously are not part of Vojvodina), how would you cover this with an Vojvodina-based article? Or you suggest that there should be another separate article named "Persecution of Croats in Central Serbia"? Also, you did not answered why current title "Persecution of Croats in Serbia" would be bad or inaccurate. Anyway, I do not see a point of splitting this issue into several articles. There should be one article that could cover whole topic - therefore, topic of this article should be merged or expanded with other articles. Perhaps we should use title "Persecution of Croats during the Yugoslav wars" which could cover all related events in all countries of former Yugoslavia - Croats were also persecuted in Bosnia and Kosovo, so why focusing only on Serbia or on one part of Serbia. PANONIAN 08:47, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The fact that "you never heard" about something is not an evidence that "something does not exist"." - True, but the fact that there isn't an article about it on Wikipedia leads me to think that it is NOT NOTABLE. It might be just a NEOLOGISM coined by you for all I know. Try proving otherwise. Oh right - you don't normally prove stuff - you just produce rants.
  • "Since there is no doubt that these events also occurred in Zemun, Novi Beograd and Surčin (which obviously are not part of Vojvodina), how would you cover this with an Vojvodina-based article?" - 1. Neither Surčin, Novi Beograd or Zemun ARE MENTIONED IN THE ARTICLE. Also, I couldn't really give a flying fuck if there was also a Croat expelled from Tokio, it still wouldn't merit expading the scope of the article to the entire planet. 30-40 thousand people were expelled according to estimates - how many of them were expelled from PLACES OUTSIDE VOJVODINA? Oh right, you have no fucking clue and you don't see a reason why you should.
  • "Also, you did not answered why current title "Persecution of Croats in Serbia" would be bad or inaccurate." - How about BECAUSE EVERY FUCKING SOURCE TALKING ABOUT IT DEFINES IT AS SOMETHING PERTAINING TO VOJVODINA? Timbouctou (talk) 10:40, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Let see: 1. I said that there is no reason that we discuss political issues, so let avoid it, 2. Parts of Syrmia that belong to Belgrade are not currently mentioned in the article, but that does not mean that they should not be mentioned. Also, much more Croats left from Bosnia than from Vojvodina (or from Serbia) and, yet, we do not have an article about "Persecution of Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina". Is it logical that we do not have an article about Persecutions of Croats in Bosnia (from where as much as 300,000 Croat refugees left according to some estimations) and yet we have one about Serbia (from where much less Croat refugees left). Furthermore, you now proposing that Croats who left from Bosnia are completely ignored, that Croats who left from Central Serbia and Kosovo are completely ignored and that we focus only on events in Vojvodina. Excuse me, but that cannot look as anything else instead attempt of presenting Vojvodina in bad light. As I said, the most suitable name for this article would be "Persecution of Croats during the Yugoslav wars" and it should describe events in all countries and regions. Once we agree that article should include all that, I will personally expand it with data about events in Bosnia, Kosovo and Central Serbia. 3. It is simply not correct that "every source relates these events to Vojvodina". Some of the sources are relating these events to Serbia and some other to Syrmia, but, as I said, most of the Croats are expelled from Bosnia during Yugoslav wars and that fact should not be ignored. I am not saying that we should speak about "persecutions of Croats in whole World", but only about persecutions during Yugoslav wars since these wars are closely related events. PANONIAN 10:52, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Most incidents occurred in Vojvodina. Zemun, Novi Beograd and Surčin we mention them in the article that are part of Belgrade. --Sokac121 (talk) 19:14, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Most" is not same as "all" and therefore usage of term "Vojvodina" in the article would be clearly misleading. PANONIAN 19:22, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have found excellent evidence Timbouctou. PANONIAN for everything good that happens according Vojvodina, and everything bad is trying to switch to Serbia, or simply cover up. --Sokac121 (talk) 09:50, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What evidence? The only thing that we can coclude from "evidences" is that there are at least 3 references to place where this happened: Syrmia, Vojvodina and Serbia. Since part of these events happened outside of Syrmia and outside of Vojvodina, only term "Serbia" could cover all. There is simply no argument for the opposite. PANONIAN 09:54, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Title scope

[edit]

War in Croatia went on 1991-95. The events talked about here happened 1991-92. So maybe it should say so in the title. Timbouctou (talk) 15:29, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

The article name is awkward. It implies that there was a state-organized persecution of an ethnic group, and that this was part of a conflict. Actually, the departure was the result of harassment endured by ethnic Croats in some villages of Vojvodina after Radical Party leader Šešelj's speech in Hrtkovci that alleged 17 individuals to be Croatian National Guard members. There were no massacres as in Croatia and Bosnia, but brawls, interestingly in which Serb neighbours protected the Croats and were themselves beaten up. It was not part of the Croatian War, nor did it take place throughout that war. These Vojvodina Croats exchanged properties with Croatian Serbs, of whom there would be 330,000 refugees in Serbia and Montenegro. As per failing Wikipedia:Notability, I suggest that the article content be summarized into the "Yugoslav Wars"-section in Croats in Serbia, then deleted.--Zoupan 06:37, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose stale merge proposal with no support over more than 2 years. Also, Yugoslav Wars section no longer exists in Croats in Serbia. If anything, it would seem a better fit for Croatian War of Independence. Klbrain (talk) 21:56, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge content with Hrtkovci, since that is the main area where persecution/expulsion occurred. 23 editor (talk) 15:25, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into history section at Croats of Serbia, summarize at Hrtkovci.--Zoupan 20:02, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Specific topic that should stay in specific article. Notability of persecution is indisputable (subject matter of ICTY), as well as the fact that Serbian/Yugoslav state still supported persecution of Croats (police was conducting searches of Croat homes along with White Eagles). Persecution was related to the Croatian War of Independence (not directly part of it) considering anti-Croat sentiment among Serbs in Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina... Also, content cannot be related only to Hrtkovci, as it is known that just in Syrmia was ethnically cleaned 27 villages which were settled by Croats until then. All together, 40,000 persecuted Croats. Ernies73 (talk) 13:40, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Persecution_of_Croats_in_Serbia_during_the_Yugoslav_Wars&oldid=1257947103"