Talk:Semir Osmanagić

Cayce

His research coincides with edgar cayce's theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.143.124.168 (talk • contribs) 07:29, 19 May 2006‎

Archaeologist?

As archaeology is a true profession requiring extensive education, training, and experience, isn't it biased to use this term to describe Osmanagić, even with the qualifier "hobby"? It's like saying someone is a hobby surgeon.

At the same time, wouldn't pseudoarchaeolgist, pyramidologist or especially pseudohistorian be more descriptive and unbiased terms, given what his publications? (Ronz 01:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC))

I think it's reasonable to refer to non-professionals engaged in archaeological digs as "hobbyist" or "amateur" archaeologists. On the other hand, adding "pseudo" in front of a title or profession someone claims is making a POV judgement. — JEREMY 02:11, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like positive bias to me. He's not just engaged in a dig, he's the one justifiying it, raising the funds, and claiming he has the expertise to know what is there. He's a hobby surgeon doing open heart surgery, telling everyone that it all going well. (Ronz 23:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC))

Removed all claims about Osmanagić from the introduction that have been criticised by highly reliable and verifiable sources such as Archaeology magazine. --Ronz 20:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Add this

http://bpblognews.blogspot.com/2009/06/semir-osmanagic-has-been-inducted-into.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.138.37.120 (talk) 18:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

This is not encyclopedically important. The so-called "Russian Academy of Natural Sciences (RAEN)" is a "public organization". It has no connections whatsoever to the Russian state and to the official science. СЛУЖБА (talk) 14:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

BLP applies here

WP:BLP applies to this article. This article should not be used as a soapbox to promote Osmanagić or his interests. If an independent, reliable source is not available to verify information, the information likely doesn't belong in this article. --Ronz (talk) 23:12, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Ronz, could you please explain what is a difference between the article in criticism section and the one in praise section which was removed. Archeology Magazine is more adequate than Swelim's research? There are articles in Archeology magazine written by students. So what makes it more reliable?

And the claim about soapbox is also disputable. We are not praising anybody just quoting opinions on Osmanagich's work as others quote some scientists who say Osmanagich's work sucks. So please be neutral and allow both opinions to be published as long as they come from reliable sources. Borchica (talk) 07:49, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Archeology Magazine is and independent, reliable source and a expert-level source for such analysis. It most certainly meets all our criteria and more for what is appropriate for archeology-related articles and WP:BLP.

Swelim's opinions are just his personal opinions, unsuitable for most use per WP:PST, WP:UNDUE, WP:FRINGE, and WP:SOAP.

The claim of WP:SOAP is spot on. His foundation is not a reliable source. We have to be especially careful not to make this a venue for the foundation and their pov. --Ronz (talk) 19:51, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Swelim belongs in as someone notable in his own right who was apparently supporting Osmanagic's claims until his last report, where he says effectively that it is a natural hill that he thinks can be called a pyramid even if it isn't manmade. Dougweller (talk) 20:35, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

inline

The citation should not be links. Also a few seems to be iffy. http://unsa.ba/s/index.php?option=com_content&task=archivecategory&id=1&Itemid=243 makes no mention that I can see of Mr Osmanagić, http://www.asalex.org/cultural_program.html, appears to be a dead link, http://www.metcompany.net/ also males no mention of him..Slatersteven (talk) 18:29, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Proffesor?

The source for this only lists him as a faculty member with a degree in anthropology, not as a professor of anthropology. Is there a better source for the claim? Also his own website does not make this claim so is there any evidence these are the same people?Slatersteven (talk) 18:36, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

And is it worth mention? --Ronz (talk) 19:52, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I think that's the main point. It certainly does not belong in the lead as it isn't something he's known for, although his being a faculty member should be in the article somewhere, with no title unless the university's site gives one. Please note we should not have PhD after his name anywhere. Dougweller (talk) 20:33, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't see his name on that list of faculty members. Why does such a person even have a wiki article about them? It seem that any cartoon character should also have its own article, by the same measure. 212.232.24.57 (talk) 03:45, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

doctorate

I cannot find him on Lista diplomiranih (Bolonja) 2009/2010. could you proivide a direct link please. Thre appears to me no search tool into which a date can be enterd on the front page that I can see.Slatersteven (talk) 15:10, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Is this the person, Mr. SEMIR OSMANAGIÆ, the name is different any evidance they are the same?Slatersteven (talk) 15:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Ć is the letter used in some Slavic languages and a lot of south Slavic surnames end with this letter. It is often swapped with letter C or CH because there is no such letter on US/UK keyboards. that's why it comes to different spellings of his names - Osmanagich, Osmanagic, Osmanagić. OK? And now the ciattion is also valuable or still it is not? Anyway a lot of other web pages and authors refer to Dr Osmanagic as Dr or Ph D (DR is used in Europe for Ph D title and it is put in front of the name or surname)so I consider this debate closed. Bolonja is transcription of Bologna (again in some Slavic languages), city in Italy and type of European university study programme/system. Borchica (talk) 07:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Æ is a frequent mojibake for Ć. No such user (talk) 12:56, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for actually explaining that. But I am still not sure that this establishes that they are the same person. There is an element of Synthesis Source A says he has a PhD, source B says that some one with a similar name has a PhD so they must be the same person. I could find any number of people with my name, but they are not all me. We need sources that make if clear where (and when as his own site says he received the Degree three years before in 2007) he got his degree, not a synthesis of sources. That he has a PhD seems clear (and Doug says that he knows it was from Sarajevo from an offsite contact) but we need verifiable sources for this. I would also add that the current source is very poor because any one clicking the link is taken to a blank page. They have to then search for a date (which there is no instruction to do in out link) so it will appear to be an unsourced claim.Slatersteven (talk) 14:48, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

The current link to Google Translate is fairly direct. This interview [1] (in Serbo-Croatian) also hints that he has the dissertation in preparation; it is favorable to Osmanagić, but I think we can safely presume that is him. His first name is not particularly frequent, so a possibility of a namesake is negligible. No such user (talk) 14:58, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

That interview is five years old. I added a direct link to his dissertation a few hours ago along with some of its content on the front page. Dougweller (talk) 17:09, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

His PhD is rather bogus. The two professors that served on his thesis committee have never published a single paper or a book on the subject of Mayas. Besides, the University of Sarajevo has been in a lot of troubles recently, the corruption of their faculty amongst other things. Also, his Masters was in economics. No credibility whatsoever. 212.232.24.57 (talk) 03:41, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Bibliography

I don't know if we lost some entries with all the changes in the last month, nor what should be listed. I did some quick cleanup, and it needs much more. Anyone know the guideline for such sections? --Ronz (talk) 20:43, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:MOS-BIBLIO is one, but doesn't give us guidelines on selection info. --Ronz (talk) 19:55, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

American University In Bosnia And Herzegovina

This is a new private university. Osmanagic seems to be on the faculty, but I'm at a loss to understand this summer school [2] on Bosnian megalithic sites. It says INSTRUCTOR: Dr.sci. Sam Semir Osmanagic (although he has no qualifications in archaeology), and the reading list beggars belief:

- Osmanagich, Sam (2011), Pyramids around the World, Foundation APBPS
- Swelim, N. (2011), The Pyramids, Pyramid Study and Construction, The Bradshaw Foundation, http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/pyramids_of_egypt/nabil_swelim.php)
- Quigley, Carroll (2010)[a reprint], The Evolution of Civilizations, Liberty Fund, Inc.
- Hancock, Graham (2010), Lost Knowledge of the Ancients, Bear & Company
- Osmanagich, Sam (2005), The World of the Maya, Gorgias Press LLC
- Coppens, Phillip (2007), The New Pyramid Age, O Books
Swelim's ok, but the rest are either fringe or a very conservative historian quoted by conspiracy theorists. I've got some details on Osmanagic's thesis I'll put up later. And his tv series - Ethiopians in South America, etc. Dougweller (talk) 21:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Professor

I've removed this from the lead. It is clearly not his primary occupation and I'm puzzled at the title. Yes, he's running (along with a couple of other fringe authors) a summer school at the new private university the American University in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This is a basically undergraduate institution with no social sciences departments, and his PhD is in sociology. But this isn't a professorship as we know it. Dougweller (talk) 17:57, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

He is on the faculty list here [3] but with no title. The university's requirements for hiring faculty are here [4] which says To become part of Faculty Staff in American University you need to fulfill following requirements:

Requirements set by the Law Of Higher Education in B&H:

For an Assistant professor position, candidate must meet the following conditions: To Have PhD diploma published at least three scientific papers in acknowledged publications and previous teaching experience.

For an Associate professor position, candidate must meet the following conditions: to have published at least one book, published at least three scientific papers in acknowledged publications, published at least one project innovation or original method all that upon acquiring vocation of assistant professor and a successful mentorship (tutorship) for the levels of the second cycle master’s studies.

For an Full professor position, candidate must meet following conditions: to have published at least two books, published at least eight scientific papers an acknowledged publications, all that upon acquiring vocation of associate professor and a successful mentorship (tutorship) for the levels of the second and third cycle master’s and doctoral studies. Given the standards they claim, he doesn't seem to have met even the qualifications for assistant professor as he hasn't had 3 papers published nor is there any evidence of previous teaching experience. Dougweller (talk) 18:25, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

His name is not on their faculty list that you linked to. 212.232.24.57 (talk) 03:36, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Russian Academy of Natural Sciences

I'm trying to figure out what the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences actually is and if we're presenting it properly. Anyone know what the institution is? --Ronz (talk) 23:10, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

As the official page is temporarily down I was trying to find another source and I suggest we keep it until the original page is back in function. I believe that it satisfactorily explains what RANS is. Here are the members who received Nobel prize. http://www.raen.ru/science/Nobel_mov/Nobel_winners.shtml And here is another explanation about RANS. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Russian_Academy_of_Natural_Sciences Borchica (talk) 00:48, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

It's one of many academies in Russia and a particularly notorious one, unlike the Russian Academy of Sciences - as the web page says, it includes a lot of politicians, businessmen, etc. It's notorious because it also includes a lot of fringe scientists. This [5] discusses it in some detail. We mention it in a number of articles in a straightforward manner. I think until we create a balanced article on it, unlike the Citizendium one, we need to let it stand. Dougweller (talk) 05:58, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that. That's similar to what I've seen elsewhere. It appears to have been used and perhaps established to give credibility to politicians and businessmen by granting them degrees and membership. I don't know if we can verify this well enough to make any decisions on, nor if it is still the case.

The Citizendium article is sourced only with publications from RANS itself, so it gives us nothing other than how RANS presents itself.

I guess we leave it unless further sources are found. --Ronz (talk) 17:42, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I've removed it because of the recent edit-warring over it. I don't see a strong case for it's removal though. --Ronz (talk) 16:07, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Again, please stop passing around disinformation that there has been an edit war after only one reversal took place, as can be seen in my Talk. You know that it takes three or more reversals to call it an edit war, right? Read regulations! Besides, you know well that the reference to a Russian academy (private company called academy) alone would make the article biased unless it also clarified (due to obvious potential for confusion) that it's not the national Russian academy of science, but a private company of a similar name. Please have in mind that Wikipedia is read largely by unsuspecting audience. Ideabeach (talk) 16:32, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

The material has been removed from the article. I believe we're done.

Please read WP:EW. You're confusing it with the Three Revert Rule. Also note that WP:BLP states "Contentious material about living persons (or in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." See also WP:BLPREMOVE. --Ronz (talk) 17:02, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

External links within article body

I've tagged two external links here in the body of the article. These violate WP:EL (especially ELNO #19) and WP:CITE because they are not sources for any information in the article, but simply links to pages on the mentioned organizations websites. --Ronz (talk) 17:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Masters thesis: "Addressing Invented Heritage : the Case of the Bosnian Pyramids"

See [6] and another paper, "http://cambridge.academia.edu/TeraPruitt/Papers/118276/Contextualising_Alternative_Archaeology_Socio-Politics_and_Approaches" "Contextualising Alternative Archaeology: Socio-Politics and Approaches", in T. Pruitt and D. Yates (eds.), Invention and Reinvention: Perceptions of Archaeological Practice. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 24.1. Looks like a lot of useful stuff for the article.Dougweller (talk) 12:58, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

What's the general consensus across Wikipedia to use such sources? I've seen discussions about such sources, but never paid much attention to the final consensus, if any. --Ronz (talk) 19:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Something wrong...

How is it that nowhere in this article is any mention of the fact that his Visocica Hill project was a hoax? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.253.187.64 (talk) 21:27, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Bosnian Valley of the Pyramids

Semir got his idea in April 2005. He more or less immediately proceeded to write his book "Bosnian Valley of the Pyramids" where he made the claims of five structures etc. On what kind of research did he base this? This was well before they had begun to dig. I am quite curious about this book and would welcome a brief description of its contents. Hexmaster (talk) 11:26, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

This is not a forum for general discussion. You may gain some insight reading Bosnian pyramids and its discussion page. --Ronz (talk) 16:46, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Online Petition signed by lead archaeologists

I think this Online Petition against Mr. Osmanagich's vandalism deserves to be mentioned in the article, see the following notable reference:

http://www.online-archaeology.co.uk/Contribute/ArchaeologyForums/tabid/58/aft/1163/Default.aspx

The link on that site is outdated. Here is the correct link to the online petition: http://peticija.comyr.com/eng.htm Ideabeach (talk) 16:51, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

It change, now : http://peticija.site88.net/eng.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.13.242.216 (talk) 21:18, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

The petition is signed by some lead archaeologists, not only British. 178.78.212.42 (talk) 03:08, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Smithsonian's comment on his book

So we've an editor that wants this information out. Why? Smithsonian is reliable. --Ronz (talk) 22:24, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

In his book Alternative History he proposed that Hitler and other leading Nazis escaped to an underground base in Antarctica.

What he wrote was "The last days of April 1945. Hitler, Martin Boorman, Eva Braun and core "Nazi" leadership fleeing in Antarctica." I have no idea what this is being denied. Dougweller (talk) 10:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Anybody can read Osmanagic's text about Hitler in his book "Od masona do mentalnih projekcija", chapter "Antarktika (8)" ; http://www.alternativnahistorija.com/AH1.htm#8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilinka Z (talk • contribs) 11:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, copied this to WP:RSN. Dougweller (talk) 11:59, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

References

Categories

Can Osmanagich be considered a 'Bosniak'/'Bosnian Muslim', etc.? There is no evidence (to my knowledge) that he self-professes as any of these (although there is evidence that he is a follower/admirer of numerous New Age religions), and I believe he is from a 'mixed marriage'. His father (from whom his Muslim surname comes) is Atheist, and I think his mother is/was Catholic. I'd feel more comfortable if religious/ethnic categorization was omitted in the Categories section at the bottom of the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.80.42.181 (talk) 16:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Per WP:BLP, if we don't have a reliable source, it's best to leave it out. Are you commenting on something currently in the article (that I'm overlooking), or proposing an addition? --Ronz (talk) 18:42, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm commenting on the 'Categories' section at the bottom of the page, which includes him under 'Bosniak People' and 'Bosniaks of Bosnia and Herzegovina'. I would suggest removal of these and replacement with a category such as 'People from Bosnia and Herzegovina'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.80.42.181 (talk) 15:27, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, and very good point. I'm having trouble finding any related discussions or alternative categories. I'm going to remove them and see if we get any response from editors that might be more familiar with the issues. --Ronz (talk) 16:03, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Bosnian pyramid hoax and Osmanagic's mentor

These additions were hastily removed by Ronz:

Mainstream science considers the "Bosnian pyramids" case to be a cruel hoax: "...This scheme is a cruel hoax on an unsuspecting public and has no place in the world of genuine science. It is a waste of scarce resources that would be much better used in protecting the genuine archaeological heritage and is diverting attention from the pressing problems that are affecting professional archaeologists in Bosnia-Herzegovina on a daily basis".

Repovac himself never published on the Mayas, and according to his official faculty page he is largely known as a Marxist who concentrated on ideology rather than anthropology which Osmanagić claims to be a professor of.

Ronz, on the Bosnian pyramids page you expressed doubts in the EAA and its Declaration. Are you having some personal issues with that mainstream organization? Because your displeasure with them is like saying IEEE opinions don't represent the mainstream view of that profession. Also, Mr. Osmanagic's mentor is really a marxist/ideology professor as can be seen from his official faculty page (use an online translator if you don't believe), not anthropologists, and he never published on the Mayas. In spite of this, Mr. Osmanagic claims to be an anthropology professor, and expert on Mayas even. Those are all very important issues that must be noted in his main bio article as they expose him as a crook and his whole ordeal as a hoax, adding to what the seven distinguished scientists from the EEA endorsed when they wrote their famous Declaration but which you keep downplaying for reasons known only to you. Are you some acquaintance of his, or are you him, perhaps? Please treat mainstream archaeology as you would physics, medicine and any other science community, would you? It's sickening to see some trying to portray this man as a distinguished scientist, by simply deleting all the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Now, I'd like to ask you to please revert those reverts yourself, as your action doesn't make sense. Thanks. Ideabeach (talk) 18:55, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Please WP:FOC.

Please follow WP:BLP. Please remove all unsourced statements about him from your comments above so this doesn't violate BLP.

If you can find sources about Osmanagic and his PhD advisor, then we can discuss if and how to incorporate that information. Otherwise it violates multiple policies as I mentioned when I removed the material.

As for the "hoax" label, we're discussing it on the other article. Let's figure it out there first, where BLP isn't an issue of with the main article topic. --Ronz (talk) 20:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

I've removed the material again. The relevant discussions at Talk:Bosnian pyramids haven't come to any clear consensus for changes there, much less here where BLP directly applies.

The problem with the general label of hoax in this BLP is that it could be taken to mean that Osmanagić is deliberately defrauding others. Whatever we say, it needs to be clear, well-sourced, and directly relevant to Osmanagić.

As for his PhD advisor, Repovac, find sources that discuss his qualifications that specifically mention Osmanagić, then we can work from those sources. Otherwise they are blatant WP:SYN, WP:NPOV, and WP:BLP violations. --Ronz (talk) 17:18, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

You had no right to do so. Repovac's personal faculty page is the prime source, more reliable than any secondary sources like the interview you quoted in which only the editorial subtitle calls him a "professor of the sociology of culture and history of civilization". His Faculty page doesn't state that at all. Please find a more reliable source than an interview's editorial subtitle. Those are always, without exception, a part of normal editorial process in journalism and you should know this if you want to reference newspapers properly. Editorials are entirely made up by the journalist or an editor. In other words, the Repovac's professorial title you used in Mr. Osmanagić's article did not come from Repovac or his Faculty, but as far as we know it is the journalist's or editor's own interpretation. Please provide a reliable source or remove his title. Ideabeach (talk) 15:29, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Please read WP:BLP.

Please focus on content.

When you refer to a sources, specifically indicate which, and do check if that other cited sources might actually verify the content under dispute. --Ronz (talk) 16:24, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

You know exactly what reference, because there is only one supporting your version of Repovac's professorial title: Ref.12, a magazine website: http://www.bhdani.com/arhiva/147/inter.htm%7Cpublisher=Dani Ideabeach (talk) 16:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for identifying the reference. Now I see what you're referring to. I think you have a good point. Did you look for other information on Repovac? Let me see what I can find. --Ronz (talk) 17:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

It was added here. --Ronz (talk) 17:12, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure on the translations. It would help to get someone fluent identify his titles and positions from http://www.fpn.unsa.ba/ba/nastavno-osoblje/repovac-hidajet/ . --Ronz (talk) 17:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

What was added? Please be more specific when referring to sources, as you warned me above. But in case you meant citing of the International Conference on the Bosnian Pyramids, I hope you are joking, correct? I mean you do know it was Mr. Osmanagić's private Foundation that organized that event? We need reliable sources, meaning third-party, independent, etc. Remember? How you manage to switch your knowledge/amnesia of Wikipedia regulations on and off so quickly, beats me. Ideabeach (talk) 17:24, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Please WP:FOC and follow WP:BATTLE

Are you familiar with what a link is? I provided a link to a WP:DIFF that shows the time/date/editor/edit: "here"

So are you interested in working on this? --Ronz (talk) 17:30, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

All i'm saying is that a magazine's editorial subtitle can't be considered a reliable source. If the professorial title has indeed come out of the mentor's mouth during the interview (but we see it didn't), or can be verified on the mentor's Faculty page, I'd say leave it. The title must be removed until a reliable source is found that verifies his title. But somehow I doubt such a source will ever be found. Just look how pompous that title is, it reads like Abner Ravenwood's: "it is said that Ravenwood disliked the British for their "armchair anthropology" ". Now if that doesn't sound like Osmanagić, I don't know what does. The whole affair reads as if copied straight from the Marvel's original comic book. Except it's not as funny. Ideabeach (talk) 17:02, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I've requested help from a translator here. --Ronz (talk) 21:51, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Good. In the meantime, please revert the section title that mentioned word hoax. You rephrased that section to "Scholarly reception". You did it in the middle of vote, which you lost by the way. Ideabeach (talk) 17:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I asked another translator to help after the first was delayed. From the discussion, I'm going to trim the article a bit to indicate he's a professor of sociology at FPN. --Ronz (talk) 00:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Are you sure it is sociology and not a different discipline called social studies? Dougweller (talk) 05:44, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

No. I simply cannot find the information I'd expect about an academic that was once a Dean. I find it very strange that the two we have are so unspecific. --Ronz (talk) 14:43, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Btw an April 1996 Associated Press article describes him as "Professor Hidajet Repovac, head of sociology at Sarajevo University", and Radio Free Europe's article published about a week later says "Professor Hidajet Repovac of Sarajevo University's Sociology Department". His best known work is a 2003 book titled "The Sociology of Symbolic Culture" in which he provides a sociological examination of various forms of art, from architecture to literature. Timbouctou (talk) 16:19, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

A professor of that name has just been charged by Bosnian Federal Police with embezzlement: http://www.federalna.ba/bhs/vijest/69164/video-zloupotrebe-polozaja-na-fakultetu-za-kriminalistiku. Why I'm not surprised. Ronz can ask translation help again, but I'm satisfied with Google translator. Boy is this becoming fun. Ideabeach (talk) 17:25, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any reason to follow up with this, since it seems totally unrelated to the topic of this article, Osmanagić. --Ronz (talk) 16:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Osmanagić's professorial title of "professor of anthropology" and the American University in Bosnia and Herzegovina

We have no reliable sources saying that the American University in Bosnia and Herzegovina does indeed offer anthropology or archaeology program or a course even. For example, their official Calendar would be one such acceptable source. Because their list of Academic Majors lists neither anthropology nor archaeology in the lists of majors and courses (use the right-column menu to open Java tables with every single course they offer from undergraduate to doctoral, in all four undergrad divisions, both Masters divisions, and all three doctoral divisions). As far as we can tell, calling Mr. Osmanagić a "professor of anthropology" is his own claim, or a webmaster's deed if it was picked from some of the school's pages as I suspect happened here. In either case, his title as presently stated in the article is unofficial, and therefore unreliable as well. We need a reliable source, or else I move to delete his professorial title as currently shown. After the reference to his membership in a Russian academy (a private company called academy) was removed because it was confusing general audiences into believing he's a member of the national Russian Academy of Sciences, the professorial title remained the crux of this article, making Mr. Osmanagić appear as a distinguished scientist with perhaps strange ideas. That would be a largely inaccurate portrayal if no reliable sources are cited that confirm his professorial title. Ideabeach (talk) 17:01, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what's up with this university, but [7] ]shows they are trying to build an institute for fringe archaeology. Dougweller (talk) 17:57, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Even if they were (it doesn't say they are), trying to build and having built are two different things. Perhaps I'm missing something, but Wikipedia is about verifiable facts on current and past events and people. Never heard of an encyclopedia on future, might be facts. Ideabeach (talk) 17:10, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I've no idea what you are talking about. I wasn't suggesting we say that, just that it appears they are doing that, but that doesn't belong in the article. You seem not to have read the page. "Director of the Center for Archaeology: Anthropology Professor Sam Semir Osmanagich, Ph.D. in Mayan Studies." Dougweller (talk) 21:06, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Do you understand English? Do you understand that there is no Center (yet), that there is no anthropology course let alone program offered (yet), and that the same goes for archaeology? Fringe or not. Zilch. Keyword being yet. His title is bogus. I move again to remove this man's "professorial" title. Ideabeach (talk) 17:21, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I suspect I know a lot more about Osmanagic and his nonsense then most people, and I know that his 'PhD' would be laughed at at my alma mater, Yale. And the 'center' is basically in name only, although I believe its run some activities. But universities can confer titles as they will, and they gave him the title. We just call him by his surname in the article though, we don't call him Professor. Why don't you spend time building up a bit on what he has written about the Maya? The article needs to show more of his ideas so that people understand the problems. Dougweller (talk) 20:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

His name is not listed on the University's faculty list, and there is no program or course called anthropology or archaeology, or even remotely similar. Therefore I removed the reference to him being a professor, until a credible evidence is presented to the opposite. Ideabeach (talk) 17:19, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

The information is sourced and appears to meet all relevant policies. The source isn't in dispute. I agree with the information being immediately restored as it was. --Ronz (talk) 16:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Hand-waving. Please present proof he's a professor in the alleged areas. I'm also reverting the info on his apparently criminal mentor. The EAA calls Osmanagić a hoaxer, and the Bosnian police are now saying they believe his mentor is a criminal too. Hard to imagine a better source than the police. Ideabeach (talk) 16:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

And we don't say he's a professor, etc, we say he holds the titles. I'm going to take a break, but I've bought 2 of his recent books and I'll use some of them when I get back. Dougweller (talk) 20:41, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

When you call someone a professor then yes, you are saying he's a professor. So you bought his books? While Osmanagić will thank you for a free commercial I personally don't believe you really bought his books. I do thank you for the laughter you gave me, however... Can you Osmanagić groupies get any lower than this? You so sound like the man himself, with your "any commercial is a good commercial" economic strategy, as he's actually a trained economist and marketeer.Ideabeach (talk) 16:37, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I've deleted part of Ideabeach's post above as a WP:BLP violation. Dougweller (talk) 17:55, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

My two cents, if it counts for anything: Yes, Osmanagich does hold the title of 'Professor' at AUBiH. Despite this, he has no teaching or research responsibilities there. Unfortunately a reliable source will never be found for this, but his title is largely honorific, secured through a 'donation', as is the case with a small number of other professors there. Bosnia and Herzegovina has a series of laws (in the Federation set at the Cantonal level, for AUBiH this is dependent on the campus at which you hold your position, but I believe there is very little variation in the law between cantons) on who can become a professor, including the legal requirement to publish a certain number of books. Bizarrely, these books do not need to be subjected to peer review or from a renowned academic publishing house. Hence Osmanagich's ability to fulfill the necessary criteria and become a professor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.80.42.215 (talk) 13:50, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Bibliography seems long

This seems a bit long. But I found a new one, "Ancient History from Beyond the Veil" - note his 2 new books are just ebooks published by his co-author on this Ancient History one, if 'published' is the right word. Dougweller (talk) 20:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Both of these books are just crank stuff. I bought them, lord forgive me. Dougweller (talk) 05:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

No you didn't buy any of his books. You keep posting this nonsense all over the place. I think you are Osmanagić or one of his groupies. He's a trained economist and a marketeer, and he sure appreciates the "any commercial is a good commercial" economic strategy. Ideabeach (talk) 16:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I've trimmed it down to just the English ones, the rest seem to be the same books in different languages, IRWolfie- (talk) 11:38, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Please stop these personal attacks. Of course I bought his books, I quote from one of them below and will do so for the other and work it into the article. And what part of 'Both of these books are just cranks stuff" has convinced you I like the guy? It's embarrassing to real academics that he's been given that title, but we can't pretend it didn't happen.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 17:55, 18 August 2013‎

Pyramids Around the Worid

In the conclusion of this book he observes that besides being spiritual centres and storing "informatics knowledge", that "Last, maybe the most important and secret fact, is that pyramids were generators of several types of electromagnetic energy with an extremely important influence on the nearby area." He also states that to fully understand " the purpose and function of these structures" will require examine their "physical, energy and spiritual aspects."

While discussing the BP energy beam he says "This is the first proof of non-heroism technology on the Planet. It seems that the pyramid-builders created the perpetual mobile a long time ago and this " energy machine" is still working." ( his quotation marks) Dougweller (talk) 22:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

He dates the step pyramid at Saqara to the late Stone Age. Dougweller (talk) 22:05, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

That should read "non-Hertzian" as in Non Hertzian Waves as proven by Nikola Tesla. Can't argue with correct Mathematics...

82.127.43.154 (talk)truth_the_solipsists_DEVIL —Preceding undated comment added 14:33, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

References used in his doctorate dissertation

Which is at http://www.google.co.uk/url? [remove this space, needed to allow url] sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&ved=0CEwQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.semirosmanagic.com%2Fba%2FMaje_-_doktorska_disertacija_jun_2009.doc&ei=Ae1oUt_nD8qi0QXX1YCACA&usg=AFQjCNG0BMRHEdGL7DiNUooQNZxFAktNHQ&sig2=j_oDiRMCSl3IKdN_XaxrHA as a Word document.

• (1) Gilbert J. Garraghan, "A Guide to Historical Method", Declan. X. McMullen, USA, 1946
• (2) Professor Donna T. Mc Caffrey: "Historical Methodology", predavanja na Providence College, USA, jesen 2003
• (3) Definicija prema: Behavioral Sciences Department, Palomar College, San Marcos, California, USA, ljetni semestar 2005
• (4) Zarefsky, David: "The Study of Effective Reasoning, Parts I and II", The Teaching Company, USA, 2002
• (5) Taylor, Royal Ervin: "Radiocarbon Dating: An Archeological Perspective", Academic Press, USA, 1987
• (6) "Mexico Travel Book", AAA Publishing, Florida, 2001
• (7) Osmanagich, Sam: "The World of the Maya", Gorgias Press LLC, New Jersey, USA, 2005
• (8) Diego de Landa, "An Account of the Things of Yucatan", Monclem Ediciones, Mexico, 2003
• (9) "Larousse Encyclopedia of Archeology", General editor Gilbert Charles-Picard, The Hamlyn Group, London, UK, 1972
• (10) Hawkes, Jacquetta, "Atlas of Ancient Archeology", McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1975
• (11) C. Bruce Hunter, "A Guide to Ancient Maya Ruins", University of Oklahoma Press, 1977
• (12) Sharer, J. Robert: "The Ancient Maya", fifth edition, Stanford University Press, California, USA, 1994
• (13) Charles Galenkamp, "Maya, The Riddle and Discovery of a Lost Civilization", David McKay Company, New York, 1976
• (14) Stuart, Gene S., "Secrets from the Past", National Geographic Society, USA, 1979
• (15) "The New American Desk Encyclopedia", third edition, A Signet Book, Penguin Books, USA, 1993
• (16) "The Columbia Encyclopedia", third edition, Columbia University Press, New York, USA, 1994
• (17) "The Dwellings of Eternity", editied by Alberto Siliotti, Chartwell Books, New Jersey, USA, 2002
• (18) Norton, Natasha and Whatmore, Mark, "Central America", Cadogan Books, London, UK, 1993
• (19) Fowler, William, "Maya Civilization", New York, USA, 2003
• (20) Stierlyn, Henry, "The Magnificient Realm of the Mayas", Reader's Digest, USA, 1978
• (21) Gardner, Joseph, "Mysteries of the Ancient Americas", The Reader's Digest, 1991
• (22) Herreid, Clyde Freeman: "Case Studies in Science: A Novel Method of Science Educatin", Journal of College Science Teaching (str. 221-229), February 1994, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, USA, 1994
• (23) Quigley, Carroll: "The Evolution of Civilization: An Introduction to Historical Analysis", Liberty Press, Indianapolis, USA, 1979
• (24) Osmanagi?, Semir: "Alternativna historija", TKD Šahinpaši?, Sarajevo, 2004
• (25) Osmanagi?, Semir: Alternativna povijest: Tragovima Atlantide", Indrija, Zagreb, 2003
• (26) Osmanagi?, Semir: "Civilizacije prije po?etka zvani?ne historije", TKD Šahinpaši?, Sarajevo, 2005
• (27) Osmanagi?, Semir: "Misterija Anasazija", TKD Šahinpaši?, Sarajevo, 2005
• (28) Kalifornijski "Institut za sr?anu matematiku" (Institute of HeartMath, www.hearthmath.org )
• (29) Millard, Anne: "Pyramids", Larousse Kingfisher Chambers, New York, 1996
• (30) Westwood, Jennifer: "The Atlas of Mysterious Places", Barnes and Noble, New York, 1998
• (31) C.A. Burland: "Adventuring in Archeology", Frederick Warne & Company, New York, 1963
• (32) Breeden, Robert: "Vanishing Peoples of the Earth", National Geographic Society, Washington D.C., 1968
• (33) Hatt, Carolyn: "The Maya", Virginia Beach, VA, ARE Press, ISA, 1971
• (34) Sodi, Demetrio: "The Great Cultures of Mesoamerica", Panorama Editorial, S.A., Mexico D.F., Mexico, 1983
• (35) Victor Wolfgang von Hagen, "Maya Explorer, John Lloyd Stephens and the Lost Cities of Central America and Yucatan", Chronicle Books, San Francisco, 1990
• (36) Norton, Leonard Jonathan: "Ancient America", Time Life Books, New York, 1967
• (37) Scarre, Dr. Chris, "Past Worlds, Atlas of Archeology", Border Press, Michigan, 2003
• (38) Prema studiji istraživa?a Barbare W. Fash sa Harvard University's Peabody Museum (USA), koja radi u Copanu od 1977; trenutno je direktor projekta za prezervaciju Copanovih hijeroglifskih stepenica.
• (39) "El Mondo Maya", Quimera Editores, Mexico, 2002
• (40) David Freidel, Linda Shele & Joy Parker, "Maya Cosmos", William Morrow and Company, New York, 1993
• (41) "Secrets of the Pyramids", Reader's Digest, USA, 1982
• (42) Arguelles, Jose, "The Mayan Factor", Bear & Company, Santa Fe, New Mexico, 1987
• (43) Ruz, Alberto, "Uxmal", Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico, 1974
• (44) Sodi, Demetrio, "The Mayas", Panorama Editorial, Mexico, 1983
• (45) Le Plongeon, "Sacred Mysteries Among the Mayas and the Quiches", Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Co, New York, 1909
• (46) General Information about Sayil, www.isource.com/maya/cities/sayil, Internet Solutions, 2003
• (47) Mitchell, John S.: "Archaeology: Enigmatic Quirigua", www.mayadiscovery.com, Organizacion Tips, Cancun, Mexico, 2005
• (48) Royal Ontario Museum, Agency of Ministry of Culture, Canada, 1998
• (49) Punta Mango, Cultural Tours, www.puntamango.com, El Salvador, 2004
• (50) Ilustracije iz: Leonardo Berges: "Mayan architecture: Dialogue between Men and Gods", www.mayadiscovery.com, Organizacion Tips, Cancun, Mexico, 2005
• (51) Aveni, Anthony & Hartung, Horst: The Observation of Passage through the Zenith in Mesoamerica", Archeoastronomy", No. 3, Suppl. J, p. 51-70, South Carolina, USA, 1981
• (52) Bohm, Bohumil & Bohm, Vladimir: "The Dresden Codex - the Book of Mayan Astronomy", Prague, 2004; široki izvodi iz knjige se mogu na?i na sajtu: www.volny.cz/paib/dresden_codex.htm
• (53) Mercier, Aloa Patricia: "The Maya Shamans", CPD, Wales, Great Britain, 2002
• (54) Izra?unavanja prema: David Lubman, 136 ASA Meeting, Norfolk, VA, USA, 1998.
• (55) Prema knjizi: "Sylvanus G. Morley", Robert Brunhouse, USA, 1971.
• (56) David Lubman: "An Archaelogical Study of Chirped Echo from the Mayan Pyramid of Kukulkan at Chichen Itza", Acoustical Society of America, Norfolk, Virginia, USA, October 12-16, 1998
• (57) Clark, John E., PhD, Brighan Young University, Director of BYU "New World Archeological Foundation", Chiapas, Mexico, 2002
• (58) Cristenson, Allen J.: "Popol Vuh: The Sacred Book of the Maya", O Books, USA, 2004
• (59) Garvin, Richard, "The Crystal Skull", Doubleday & Co, New York, 1973
• (60) Fotografije na web-sajtu Trocadero muzeja u Parizu: www.trocadero.com
• (61) Opširnije na web-sajtu muzeja u Londonu: www.empiremuseum.com/crystalskulls.htm
• (62) Dorland, Frank, "Holy Ice-Crustal Healing", Golden Press, St. Paul, 1992
• (63) Le Plongeon: "Sacred Mysteries Among the Mayas and the Quiches", Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Co, New York, USA, 1909
• (64) Le Plongeon, Alice and August, "Queen Mu and the Eastern Sphinx", Steiner Publications, New York, 1973
• (65) Le Plongeon, Alice and August, "Queen Mu and the Eastern Sphinx", Steiner Publications, New York, 1973
• (66) Hatt, Carolyn: "The Maya", A.R.E. Press, USA, 1976
• (67) Coe, Michael: "Breaking the Maya Code", Thames and Hudson, USA, 1992
• (68) Bohm, Bohumil & Bohm, Vladimir: "The Prague Codex - the Fifth Preserved Mayan Manuscript", www.hermetic.nofadz.com/cal_stud/maya/boehm/prague_codex/doc
• (69) Original je u Nacionalnoj biblioteci u Parizu, a fotografije se mogu na?i na: www.famsi.org/mayawriting/codices/pdf/paris_love.pdf
• (70) Kalifornijski Institut of Hearthmath, www.hearthmath.org, se bavi istraživanjem utjecaja raspoloženja na srce i mozak; kako emocije ljubavi ili straha uti?u na naš organizam.
• (71) Michael Drosnin: "The Bible Code", Touchstone, New York, USA, 1997
• (72) Zvani?ni demografski podaci Ujedinjenih naroda, Povjerenstvo za stanovništvo i razvoj, New York, 18.02.2005
• (73) Osmanagi?, Muris: "Iza drugog milenijuma", Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 2001
• (74) Innes, Hammond: "The Conquistadors", Alfred A. Knopf, New York, USA, 1969
• (75) Dr Michio Kaku, "Hyperspace: A Scientific Odyssey through Parallel Universes", Anchor Press, USA, 1995
• (76) Jenkins, John Major: "Mayan Cosmogenesis: Cosmic Mother Gives Birth", The Center of Mayan Time, USA, April 1995
• (77) "Civilization", Microsoft Encarta, Online encyclopedia, 2005
• (78) Groark, Kevin P.: "Vital warmth and well being: steambathing as household therapy among the Tzeltal and Tzotzil Maya of Highland Chiapas, Mexico", Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA, 28.01.2005.

Dougweller (talk) 10:04, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Email sent to Hidajet Repovac

I just sent this email to - Dear, Prof. dr. Hidajet Repovac,

I came across your name listed as a reference for Semir Osmanagic both, in the Wikipedia and on his 2009 university thesis.

If you take a look at the Wikipedia references; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semir_Osmanagi%C4%87#References

1. 9 his PhD Thesis

claims Prof. dr. Hidajet Repovac, mentor Prof. dr. Ivan Cvitković, predsjednik Doc. dr. Asim Mujkić, član

1. 11 interview with Hidajet Repovac

- comes up as an 'error'

1. 12 also comes up as an error

I just wanted to bring these matters to your attention.

I don't know if anyone in Wikipedia has made contact with you prior to listing your name in the references but, I will be contacting them also, in regards to this matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.213.37.127 (talk) 09:04, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't see the point. It was easy to fix the link to his university page and he isn't responsible for the Dani link. Nor do we need his permission. Dougweller (talk) 14:40, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Repeated attempts to expand the bibliography

As has already been pointed out and briefly discussed [8], we don't provide a directory of his writings but rather highlight those related to his notability as well as those that are otherwise prominent. Likewise, I don't understand why we should mention that he has been published in multiple languages. --Ronz (talk) 02:34, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

How do you know which books are related to his notability if you don't know for ex. Bosnian language? You don't allow listing of book "Alternativna historija tom I_IV"(Bosnian language) , but you consider Smithosian as relevant source which is giving citation from this book not giving its original name. I was searching, wondering where is this book "Alternative history", because I don't trust Smithosian seeing its anti-propaganda to this project and this person..so maybe other readers also wonder where is this book to check themselves. Therefore I feel this as misleading.--Indija (talk) 12:59, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia should provide as much possible objective information, as I understand and would like to have it as wiki-user, and because you don't list the same book translated in other languages I wanted to give possibility that readers can check themselves. Why there are references in Wikipedia? maybe I don't know, but I was thinking therefore that reader can get more info which is not possible to list in an article. Person from France or Germany for example can be happy to find info that some of books are translated to his native language.This makes for me, Wiki service better.--Indija (talk) 12:59, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

You don't understand how we work. Good articles have a lot of references - we are required to reference, see WP:VERIFY. And I can assure you that Wikipedia considers the Smithsonian a reliable source. You also need to read WP:FRINGE. Not knowing Bosnian is irrelevant - why should it be relevant unless you are suggesting no one outside Bosnia reads him. And obviously anyone wanting to know more about his publications would go to his websites. Dougweller (talk) 15:45, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Problems with the Smithsonian reference?

What are the problems with the Smithsonian reference? It's a reliable source. The reference says, "In another work, Alternative History, he argues that Adolf Hitler and other Nazi leaders escaped to a secret underground base in Antarctica from which they did battle with Adm. Richard Byrd's 1946 Antarctic expedition." --Ronz (talk) 02:38, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Reference was pointing to Smithosian article on page 2 where is this sentence.I am sorry I was checking only page 1 and therefore I didn't see it. Still source is not reliable for this sentence.

1. there is no English book "Alternative history", there is "Alternativna historija" written in Bosnian. I don't know if writer of article knows Bosnian,(I know it) but in this book Osmanagich does not argues but he just mention few books in which is this information about Hitler mentioned or discussed.There is difference if I say it is so or if I say in books "X", "Y" is written so. This is false info about some person.(I even don't care about subject in this sentence)

2. What relevance has this sentence to Bosnian pyramids claim (titel in Osmanagich's Wikipedia article)? Article can have separate part for ex. "Criticism".I am here just temporary because by chance I found this article about Osmanagich and I was struck how Wikipedia is not reliable and complete source of information about this person.I am sorry, this is my opinion after being little involved as new person in editing.?--Indija (talk) 12:59, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

There's a previous discussion above, which was further discussed at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_141#Smithsonian_Magazine. --Ronz (talk) 02:42, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

From my talk page:

1. book Alternative History doesn't exist. There is book "Alternativna historija tom I-IV in bosnian language. Please let it be in bibliography.I will put it soon (sorry no time now).This books are relevant and notable for Semir's work. You don't know language and cannot judge. It is not right that only few English books are here. people here may have their opinion about book if they red it, but Wikipedia is not place for book reviews or critics, or maybe I am wrong.

2. reference is leading to smithosian site and on this website there is nothing mention about this (Hitler-Antarctica). This is misleading readers. (as I am new to all this , I am checking myself to get true information, and want to help others to have them also.) reference is intentionally directing reader to site which is negative and it is again mixed little facts and more opinions not based on any prove. but anyway reference should be connected to the subject..

3. Hitler on Antarctic has nothing to do with "Bosnian pyramids claim"(title) this aricle is generally very poor without right and objective information. It is partial and according to attitude of main stream archaeologists which are for some reason against this project. Wiki should give both sides of information and people can decide themselves what they will believe. Please help me correct it as much as I have time , and as what I know is true and facts.

I can correct this sentence ..little later and please comment on your action.I would like to discuss this on site talk. Thank you.--Indija (talk) 16:50, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

The book is called "ALTERNATIVE HISTORY:The World of the Maya"[9] and at [10] I find sentences such as "he core project in Antarctica, in turn, "Base-211" or Neu Berlin. Last Days of April 1945th Hitler, Martin Boorman, Eva Braun and core "Nazi" leadership flee to Antarctica." and "More than a year after the affair with submarines America launches massive military operation under the Antarctic ice. The command is in the hands of the legendary Admiral Richard Byrd's's. Operation "HighJump" involving 13 ships, one aircraft equipment, conveyors, military equipment, 4,000 soldiers. The only official statement on the purpose of the surgery is that they want to "... test new materials under extreme conditions of the Antarctic" ... 27 January 1947th army disembarked in the current mission, "Ross Sea", moving to the west coast of the Antarctic to the northern part and Neu Schwabenland-in. After less than three weeks stay on the icy ground, Byrd returns (withdrawn?) In the United States. The public expedition proclaimed success, Admiral gets a medal ...(It is assumed that after several consecutive battles in the air and on the ice, Admiral backed away.)" That's a Google translation. So yes, he wrote that.

I'm guessing Idija didn't look at the 2nd page of the Smithsonian reference,, as it says "In another work, Alternative History, he argues that Adolf Hitler and other Nazi leaders escaped to a secret underground base in Antarctica from which they did battle with Adm. Richard Byrd's 1946 Antarctic expedition."

As this is Osmanagic's biography there is no reason to only mention his work on the so-called Bosnian pyramids, I don't understand that comment.

We don't give both sides equal time - our articles on evolution make it clear the Creationist are wrong, we don't give them equal time. But again, that's not relevant to this article. Dougweller (talk) 11:57, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm told this is in "Od masona do mentalnih projekcija", first tome of the series "Alternativna Historija". The page is this one: http://www.alternativnahistorija.com/AH1.htm (text online) and this one: http://www.alternativnahistorija.com/AH1.doc (link to DOC text) - and it's his idea. Dougweller (talk) 18:37, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

@Dougweller:: I read the discussion. If you need bosnian/croatian/serbian translation or clarification, let me know. --BiH (talk) 05:54, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

@BiH:Thanks very much for the offer. I don't need to now but might at some time. Dougweller (talk) 10:09, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I've restored the material. Without directly attacking his Osmanagić's credibility, Smithsonian used it to highlight his extreme viewpoints, as are we. --Ronz (talk) 16:01, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

His education timeline is missing!

Its like this guy is intentionally being silent about his education and the exact timeline he attended and received his degrees.

Supposedly he holds 2 bachelor degrees one in sociology and the other in business and a master degree in and a PhD in Sociology again all of witch are from the university of Sarajevo but he doesn't anywhere state the periods at witch he attended these studies and there is no clear statement in the article about his education.

This is very weird at least because he is involved into a very controversial subject and it would be just natural to state as clear as possible his high level of formal education as to be more believable in his claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.146.169.90 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 16 November 2014‎

NPOV dispute [Overview and Article]"

This article is clearly biased and using weak, non-neutral sources concerning a real project in Bosnia. Of the first 4 sources, only the single article from "Science" magazine has any real weight as a source (all being opinionated snippets at best) and even it is clearly non-neutral. That article itself admits that the "tunnels" may be man made but dismisses them as "an old mine". There is no information on the researchers' actual academic backgrounds. The bite from "Anthony Harding" begins with "Since such claims obviously belong to a fantasy world, I was inclined to ignore the affair". This represents neutrality and true science, as well as credible sourcing? Can someone please address the issue of, then, just what is in these photos?:

http://www.bosnianpyramids.org

http://www.human-resonance.org/visoko.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtpduffe (talk • contribs) 11:20, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

User:Jtpduffe I've removed the tag as this isn't the right article for your comments. This article is not about his Bosnian pyramid claims although of course it briefly mentions them. And sources can be opiniated, that's not a problem. t's the balance over all that matters, see WP:NPOV Please do also note that new users often misunderstand talk pages. These are not here to discuss the subject of the article but the article itself, ie argument over what the photos represent is not appropriate here. I'm not sure what you mean by the researchers' academic backgrounds, but most of the researchers at the Bosnian sites don't have qualifications in geology and archaeology. Doug Weller talk 17:36, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

User:Doug Weller If weak, barely credible, snippet articles are not related to the biography then why are they here? Where is a single, accurate proof of his or the teams' academic backgrounds or credentials? Opinion pieces do not count as fact for a biography. If the material shouldn't be discussed then it shouldn't have been here to begin with. These are real people, not pictures.

Still the same response - discussion of his team is in the other article where it belongs. Please bring that issue up there. Of course we have to mention his claims here. And attributed opinion pieces can be used in WP:BLPs. Doug Weller talk 10:24, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Semir Osmanagić. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060715045949/http://www.piramidasunca.ba:80/eng/podmeni/programistrazivanja/program.htm to http://www.piramidasunca.ba/eng/podmeni/programistrazivanja/program.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101125083857/http://www.bhdani.com:80/arhiva/147/inter.htm to http://www.bhdani.com/arhiva/147/inter.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:59, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

I think the entirety of this talk section is trying to undermine and libel him.

I was only noticing that most of these people (many are usually the IP kids) are attempting to undermine Semir and his work on the claimed Bosnian Pyramids. Please state your sources before turning the entire Wiki article into a hate form. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balkanite (talk • contribs) 02:50, 19 March 2020 (UTC)