Talk:Svetozar Boroević/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

addition of two sources, ref formatting

My revision was not liked, User:Kebeta's revision comment: "rv POV - don't use reference style to emphasise serb or serbian". I don't understand the sentence, I formatted the references as per MOS, more than half of the article is uncited, is there a problem if I added two Croatian sources citing directly? I mean there are 6 sources claiming "while most foreign sources simply refer to him as "Croatian"." Svetozar's declaration as Croat is cited - I think that the fact that his brother, Nikola, declared as Serb should not be neglected.--Zoupan 15:44, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The article is not about his brother, but if you feel that a fact about his brother "declared as Serb" is important fact for a field marshal than you don't have to emphasise this with the same thing in the body of the article and in reference section. Just add that text and cite it normally. Than somebody else will find a citation about his brother as Croat, and we will have an article about Nikola Boroević. :-) --Kebeta (talk) 17:33, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

...So his brother is unrelevant? It is certainly an interesting fact regarding Field Marshal Borojevic's family - I added it to "private life". As per Wikipedia:Citing sources, I fixed short citations. I'll only remove Nikola's declaration from the revision for now, sounds good?--Zoupan 20:04, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Kebeta, Zoupan's edit isn't improper, it's not inherently abusive to add content and syntax changes in one edit - it's merely annoying, but the assumption of good faith is not automatically lost because of that reason alone. Zoupan's reference style is almost entirely better - my only complaint would be that it should be *linking* into the bibliography section rather than just listing the reference - but that's a technicality.

Regarding the content - in cases of disputed ethnicity, siblings aren't irrelevant, because they show a pattern, or lack thereof - compare Ivo Vojnović and Lujo Vojnović. I agree that Zoupan is basically a POV pusher :p but this isn't an abusive way to present his POV - both Đuro Šurmin and Josip Horvat were reasonably notable persons whose claims in published works cannot be dismissed out of hand. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 07:34, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Like I have said above, I don't have a problem with his edit about Nikola Boroević, but with puting that same thing into references. Why just don't have a normal ref. like other in the article (Šurmin 1904, p. 279.)...why is necessary to have Šurmin 1904, p. 279: "Iz ovih dana još poznati Ilir iz Like Nikola Borojević prihvaća srpstvo i ističe se kao osobit Srbin,", if he already stated this into the body of the article? If we are going to apply this for that ref. why not for all of them? --Kebeta (talk) 09:57, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, actually, all references that are only pointing to page numbers of foreign works are considered flawed based on WP:NONENG, which is a reasonably modern change in the verifiability policy. In other words, it's not a bad idea that the original text was cited, indeed it should also be literally translated for clarity. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 11:47, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Very well, I wasn't aware of this. Based on WP:NONENG, I would like to ask user Zoupan to provide the original text (with the page number) which supports the fact that Nikola Borojević was a brother of Svetozar Boroević (is not necessary to provide a translation since I understand Croatian).--Kebeta (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

So, I've fixed the private-section as to cite literally, adding several sources. I've rid of Šurmin and added a ref about Nikola as colonel and receiving Austrian nobility status. Fixed ref technicality. The Isonzo-Schindler ref has 8 pages that should be used to expand the article, adding refimprove tag to top as more than half is uncited. --Zoupan 18:48, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Militär-Grenz

Croatian Military Frontier never ever existed. There was only Austrian Militär-Grenz established and ruled by the Austrian Royal Court for centuries.

Pushing a fake Croatian historiography into this article only damages it.

Croatia 2: Ludwig Von Gaj Opposes Croatia's Hungarian Heritage By Ivo Vukcevich page 81:

JOKER, FOUR LEGGED CROAT

Fortunately, such mindless 'nationalist' pornography is embarasing and shameful to numerous Croats.

It must be irony of folly that the author proclaims the Serb Svetozar Borojevic, Austro-Hungarian fieldmarshal from W.W.I for the most glorious Croatian warrior. Either a joker or a four-legged Croat

from: Zivko Gruden, Toni Gabric and Ivica Bulan, 'Depravity and Now', Feral Tribune December 29, 1997

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.220.39.77 (talk • contribs) 22 April 2015

Better references about Boroevic

Please read here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_Croatian_soldiers --65.220.39.99 (talk) 21:12, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Copied over

Based on his official biography and numerous sources referencing this biography, he was a Serb:

International Encyclopedia of Military History by James C. Bradford Routledge, Dec 1, 2004:

They were led by Svetozar Boroevic (1856-1920), a Serb

World War One: The Global Revolution by Lawrence Sondhaus Cambridge University Press, Mar 31, 2011 page 86:

Conrad sacked him in favor of General Svetozar Boroevic, ironically a Serb

The History of Bosnia: From the Middle Ages to the Present Day by Marko Attila Hoare Saqi, 2007 - History:

Austro-Hungarian commander on the Italian front in 1915-18 was General Svetozar Boroevic von Bojna, a Serb

A World War I Fact Book: The Great War in Graphs and Numbers by William Van der Kloot Amberley Publishing Limited, Oct 30, 2013:

Svetozar Boroević (18561920) [right] was a Serb who rose from corporal to corps commander in the AustroHungarian Army — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.12.17 (talk) 22:33, 31 October 2015 (UTC) --65.220.39.99 (talk) 13:06, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Croatian heritage

To whoever is removing the references to Boroevic's Croatian heritage, please explain here why the sources cited are not reliable. ... discospinster _talk 03:48, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

• Already explained above. Why you are not reading the explanations? Cited sources are not reliable for coming from academically insignificant authors, contradicting to the Austro-Hungarian archives (the official biography of their field-marshal) and to the well-known English language sources listed above.--65.220.39.92 (talk) 21:03, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't see anything above that talks about the references given in the article. Could you quote the comment you are referring to? ... discospinster _talk 23:45, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

You clearly see that Croatian "sources" are contradicting well-established English language academic sources. Serious historians are simply ignoring such "sources" for they are not worth of any comments. Moreover, the claim that Boroevic was born in Croatian Military Frontiers is a nonsense with no source at all. During a lengthy discussion about Tesla the "Croatian Military Frontiers" were rejected for there were only Austrian Military Frontiers in that part of the world. We did not remove the Croatian sources that are in the same line with the English and other languages sources referenced in the article.--65.220.39.93 (talk) 17:54, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Edit war and Pojić source

I noticed this edit-warring going on and I must say I see the objections of the IP as right. There is an agreement to use the first-level subdivisions of a country in the lead (meaning MF and not its subsection CMF) and Pojić source seems quite weak and tendentious specially regarding the Croatiassness issue. FkpCascais (talk) 16:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

JFTR it's not an "IP", it's banned User:Velebit. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 17:18, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Regardless of this I have to agree with FkpCascais. --M11rtinb (talk) 05:59, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Simple truth

This Borojević, after offering his service to Belgrade at the end of WWI, was regarded by Austria as a traitor. Serbs saw him no more than a foreign servant and worthless person. That's the reason for being rejected by both sides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.245.153.3 (talk) 11:49, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Not so simple truth

Boroević offered his service to State of Slovenes Croats and Serbs with Zagreb as capital. That has nothing to do with Kingdom of Serbia and Belgrade — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.143.116.26 (talk) 14:31, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Croatian Military Frontier?

Never ever existed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.245.153.3 (talk) 12:00, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

No? Then how it was called Serbian? Give me a break — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.252.241.58 (talk) 21:05, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Croatian Military Frontier did exist under that name. That is a verifiable fact. Walter9 (talk) 16:43, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Naval Ensign of Austria-Hungary (1918).svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:40, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Svetozar Boroević was not Serb

There is no historical data to indicate that Svetozar Boroević was of Serb, much less historical data says that he is Serb descent. Therefore, such claims first need historical data to confirm that fact.

• "Svetozar Boroević left Serbian Orthodoxy and became Greek Catholic, he considered himself Croatian and his family also. Any attachment to the Serb ethnonym would in such cases be pointless, politically motivated, voluntarist nominalism.Mikola22 (talk) 07:15, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Not a RS for this info. A nationalistically driven linguist can not top several other RS. Try to learn how Wikipedia works. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 12:49, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there is no historical data which prove that he is a Serb. We must respect that fact and in consensus come to the right solution.Mikola22 (talk) 13:26, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Otherwise I will have to ask you that you don't call Croatian historian or linguist as "nationalistically driven". Now I will not report you but this is for reporting. Try to think less about the Nazis and nationalists and more about the quality of the article. I hope we can work in good faith.Mikola22 (talk) 13:31, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

He indeed is. I am following his work and statements. I could post proofs, but I am wondering, would you even care? I do not care that he is Croatian, he could be Bengali for all I care, I am talking about his work. Please, we are not in a kafana here. And no, this is not something worthy of a report, please try to learn the difference (The Boy Who Cried Wolf). Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 22:32, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@Sadko: I could post proofs Everything you have freely present here for all to see what it is about, basic facts or original records are needed. I care because I don't want edit war. And I really didn't read that he was declared himself as a Serb. Mikola22 (talk) 08:32, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

"On u svojim istupima i pismima sve do smrti izričito navodi da je Hrvat, a domovina mu je Hrvatska." Until his death, he explicitly states in his speeches and letters that he is a Croat, a his homeland is Croatia. How then is he a Serbian in this article? So you suggest that his Serbian origin( Serb descent) should continue to be part of this article?Mikola22 (talk) 14:46, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

What seems to be the problem? A man was born to a Serb family but went on to consider and declare himself a Croat. Andrić is another case (versa vice). There is no problem in that and both information (per RS) must be kept in the article. I would advice you not to continue with deletion of sourced information about people's origin, as that is abuse of editing privileges... Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 15:14, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@Sadko: There is no problem here. But where are information that his parents are Serbs. I am waiting for this information where they are? We must not put false information in the article. Mikola22 (talk) 16:41, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@Mikola22: It may be that I am a bit dense, but as far as I can see, the sentence "Boroević was of Serb descent", which you have tried to remove, is given no less than eight references. At a quick glance they look good enough to me, but if you believe that they are not enough to support the sentence, you could raise the question at WP:RSN, something like Can the given references be seen as reliable sources for the sentence "Boroević was of Serb descent". The next sentences about his self-identification as Croat also has eight references. The two sources you have given, "he considered himself Croatian" from Grčević/Auburger and "he explicitly states ... that he is a Croat" from Pojić also supports this. I see no-one denying his self-identification, so please explain what the problem is. --T*U (talk) 17:15, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@TU-nor: How can someone be Croat when his father is allegedly Serbian? This means that he is originally a Serb. He declared himself as Croatian. Assuming that there is no information which prove that his parents are Serbs then he does not have Serbian ancestors. As for the sources, you probably see what they are talking about. ( who appointed a Serb Orthodox frontiersman (Granicar),, He was invited to lunch on a visit to a well-known Austrian military leader, originally Serb,, Svetozar Borojevic de Bojna, a Serb from Banija,, of Serb Grenzer family descent,, son of a Serbian Grenzer family from Croatia.,, regiments on this front; and one of the most successful Habsburg commanders was in fact a Serb from the old 'Military Frontier' region,, ). Where are the sources for such claims? If someone is Orthodox then he is Serbian, this is not history. There are also and Croats who were Vlachs, who became Vlachs and who became Orthodox. Where they disappeared? The problem is that Croatian history is not known and then someone with no original information draws conclusions about the origin of someone. That is why in these situations we have to go from the source. Mikola22 (talk) 17:53, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Your eternal demand for use of "original information" is rather exhausting. Wikipedia prefers reliable secondary sources, see WP:PSTS. Your question Where are the sources for such claims? is rather confusing. Do you actually demand to have sources for the sources? I repeat: If you do not trust the sources, raise the question at WP:RSN. --T*U (talk) 19:22, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@TU-nor: Reliable Sources say that Nikola Tesla is Croatian-American.[1] What it should mean when this information cannot be part of an article. I'm talking that there is no original data which say that ancestors of Svetozar Boroević are Serbs. You have to take that as a fact. Mikola22 (talk) 20:03, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@Mikola22: Let me be blunt: If you are not willing to accept the rules of English Wikipedia, you have nothing to do here. You are wasting the time of numerous editors with your incessant demand for "original data". At WP:PSTS, WP:PRIMARY, WP:SECONDARY and the rest of WP:OR you can read about the Wikipedia policy on the use of sources. Accept it, or leave. --T*U (talk) 21:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@TU-nor: Did I show you that Nikola Tesla is Croatian-American and twenty RS? Then you enter that fact in the article instead of me. Which original research? There are no information that parents of Svetozar Boroević belong to the Serbs. He's a Croat, if there is no historical information that his parents are Serbs we guess that his parents are Croats too or we don’t mention it in the article. If we have Croatian historiography who writes about these facts accurately then we just use those sources. I was telling you about medieval Bosnia edits and RS that I had and someone changes and doesn't allow to some facts be part of an article, you don't talk like this there, that is I called you there but you're not coming, I've been waiting for you there. Why are some RS here part of an article although they have no confirmation in historical sources. I have RS(book of historians) which for Sokollu Mehmed Pasha say that he is a Bosnian or Croatian. And what that means? Why this informations are not in the article? If I'm a Croatian and for my parents there is no information about origin so maybe they are Croats or we don't know. English Wikipedia "Bunjevci are a South Slavic ethnic group living mostly in the Bačka region of Serbia" Bunjevci are mostly Croats but there is no original data which proves that they are Croats and that why it is stated "South Slavic ethnic group" we also have no ancestral origin information of Svetozar Boroević but then we can't talk about them as Serbs or Croats. Let's you and me for Bunjevci write that they are Croatian group(they are all Croats in Croatia, they and originate from Croatian ethnic area). We cannot even though we have reliable sources because there is no original data which prove that. It is not original research, this is a historical fact and this is respected in the article. Mikola22 (talk) 06:08, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

no historical information that his parents are Serbs; no confirmation in historical sources; no original data which proves that they are Croats; no ancestral origin information of Svetozar Boroević; there is no original data which prove that. I rest my case! --T*U (talk) 08:04, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Whenever Croats want to prove a Serb was a Croat they pull out a letter that says I love my "Croatian fatherland", even though it didn´t exist 🤣 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.167.0.4 (talk) 11:22, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Name

@Sadko: @FkpCascais: Do you two see the differenece betwen articles of Serbs (who have a cyrillic name listed in the lead) and Serbian expats like Lene Lovich ( who has it listed later in a section). I wonder which one should apply here? SerVasi (talk) 13:28, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

That is not the case here. Your comparison is weak and it's also a logical mistake ("choose between the two"). He is not an American but Croatian of Serb origin. See - Josip Runjanin. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 13:51, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

He is an expat who doesn't use the cyrillic version officialy of personaly. The only thing that is weak is your comprehension. The point is that he doesn't see himself as a serb SerVasi (talk) 14:48, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

That is 100% off the point (and shows other motivations behind the edit). If you do not want to hear out other people's opinion/s and work with other editors, I suggest that you find another hobby. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 14:51, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Im sorry but wiki has some rules. If the version of the name is not used by the person it should not be listed. SerVasi (talk) 17:39, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Could you quote and link this rule for me? I am not aware of it. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 21:09, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Uhhhhh idk see article Donald Trump hmmmmmmm i wonder why they didn't put it there? Maybe because the person actually has to use it? SerVasi (talk) 22:50, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

You can't be serious... Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 16:57, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't think that the Cyrillic should be removed. It can be made neutral like in other articles.--Tuvixer (talk) 18:43, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I am also against complete removal but i think the article paints a different picture from what Borojević wanted. I think we should follow the example of other serb expat articles where the cyrillic version is listed in the Early life section (or the most fitting here Private life section). SerVasi (talk) 19:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Three editors have so far told you that this is not the way to go. Care to revert yourself or must I put an end to this childish game of removal of Cyrilics all over Wikipedia with a full report? Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 20:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Boroević declared himself as a Croat, all of his family were Croats. What does Cyrillic have to do with him? Mikola22 (talk) 05:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Can you explain to me why George Voinovich doesnt have cyrillic in the lead or do i have to do it again? I nicely compromised with you by adding it to the lower section but you still dont stop. Please go ahead and slander me again to some admins. SerVasi (talk) 00:25, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

George Fisher (settler), Pete Maravich, Peter Bogdanovich, Milla Jovovich these are people of Serbian origin as well. With Svetozar Boroević the matter is different because he declared himself as a Croat and considered his family to be Croatians. I don't see purpose of adding Serbian Cyrillic to the article.Mikola22 (talk) 05:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Those are Americans and the examples are irrelevant as the cases are not the same. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 11:48, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Orthodox Church vs Serbian Orthodox Church

He was baptized in the Orthodox Church (The Serbian Orthodox Church). This is the last edit. I don't know how accurate is this information considering to the time period of Svetozar Boroević birth. It would be more correct that this information is consistent with time period and existence of Eastern Orthodox Church. There is and fact that source itself mentions the Orthodox Church. I quote: "Nedvojbeno je da je Svetozar Boroević kršten u pravoslavnoj crkvi, vjerojatno parohijskoj crkvi u selu Mečenčani." "It is undoubted that Svetozar Boroevic was baptized in the Orthodox Church, probably the parish church in the village of Mecencani".(page 4, from article source)

• Jovan Cvijić, Serbian geographer and ethnologist in his scientific paper from 1918 talks about Serbian population. "The Zones Of Civilization Of The Balkan Peninsula by Jovan Cvijić Professor of Geography, University of Belgrade" I quote: "Mention should also be made of the islands of Catholic population to the west of the Bosna River in the midst of Greek-Orthodox and Moslemized Serb populations.", "The ethnic foundation of the patriarchal populations is the same among the Catholic Yugo-Slavs and the Greek-Orthodox Serbs", "The migrations which took place in the Turkish period have brought numerous Greek-Orthodox Serbs into Croatia and Slavonia".(page 481,482). Austrian Historian in his work from 2012, Popis Like i Krbave 1712. godine which deals with census of Lika says on page 21, I quote: The name "Vlach" is used in the 1712 census with two meaning. Mostly is used to indicate belonging to Greek-Orthodox community. Zlatko Kudelić Croatian Historian in his work from 2008, Serbian Orthodox Church In Bosnia And Herzegovina During The Austro-Hungarian Government, As It Is Seen In Contemporary Historiography on page 44, I quote: "Vukšić stated that until 1887(Bosnia and Herzegovina) the authorities used the name Greek-Orthodox or Eastern-Orthodox when addressing church institutions, allowing them to be called either Serbian or Orthodox, but not Serbian-Orthodox. Milorad Nikčević Croatian Historian 2013, I quote: Official church and state terminology used the name "Greek-Eastern" or "Orthodox" for all members of the Eastern Christian Church, while in the Slavic language became known as "Orthodox", which also received the official name after the unification of all Orthodox churches in the Slavic area of the former The Habsburg or Austro-Hungarian monarchies.Mikola22 (talk) 18:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

It is accurate. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 22:42, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Additional sources

• Field Marshal Boroević have honored his Croatian origin...
• Field Marshal Svetozar Boroević, a Croat
• The tough Croat, Svetozar von Boroević Mikola22 (talk) 20:38, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

WP:Citation overkill It's already in the article. Born to a Serb family, declared himself a Croat. The end. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 22:43, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

It's not "the end", there are obviously conflicting sources regarding his origin, and I see no reason why one group would have an advantage over the ones listed by Mikola22. Tzowu (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

For God's sake, there is no "adventage" as we have it all covered already. There is no issue to begin with. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 17:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

No, we don't have everything covered and there is an issue. We have a clear example of WP:SYN, where a couple of sources were joined together and used to reach a conclusion that probably none of them have - that Boroević was of Serb descent and that he declared himself a Croat. In fact, we have sources that he was of Serb descent/origin or a Serb, sources that he was of Croat descent/origin or a Croat, and sources that Boroević considered himself a Croat. Hence the WP:SYN tag. Tzowu (talk) 18:38, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I see no issue, only that people want to make an issue and I can't see why. What? There is no WP:SYN. You have added a tag out of the blue, based on what? One historian (who is not that notable to begin with) and his fringe viewpoint>? All sources presented have quotes which are pretty much saying that he was a Serb. Borojević's birhplace had Serb ethnic majority all untill the 1990s. Even more references can be provided. Wikipedia:I just don't like it is not an argument. Adding a random tag beside 7 solid sources and even more sources presented on the TP is an insult to reader's intelligence. Please revert yourself. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 20:35, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I see you lack the basic understanding of WP:SYN, or you just didn't read what the article about WP:SYN says: "If one reliable source says A, and another reliable source says B, do not join A and B together to imply a conclusion C that is not mentioned by either of the sources." Is that clear enough, do you need a translation? Besides, the wrong attribution of the source which I removed (no, that is not why I added the tag) just shows the level of scrutiny that was applied here. A second look at the sources also reveals many wrong references, such as source number 5 which doesn't say "Serb descent" but that he was "Serb Orthodox frontiersman", and source number 18 which calls him a Croat, not a "Croatian". And along with the sources already in the article, user Mikola22 provided some more here. Tzowu (talk) 21:12, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Nope, this is classical attempt to challenge something which is quite well founded. What if the greatest military commander in the history of Croatia was a Serb by birth? I see no problem with that, and more importantly - I see no arguments presented here. Nothing is combined, what are you going on about? RS are very clear. You can fix mistakes which you have found and I have fixed one already. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 22:12, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

What exactly did you "fix"? The source you moved ("Encyclopædia Britannica 1922, p. 1116") doesn't say that he was "baptized in the Serbian Orthodox Church", and the sources you added, on a part of a sentence which already has a WP:OVERCITE, don't have a page number, which again shows the lack of scrutiny here. Read WP:SYN and look at the sheer number of sources that call him a Croat. And no, you can't combine different sources to reach a conclusion which they don't. Or else, we could reverse the wording and have something like "Boroević was of Croat descent [...] and is often referred to as "Serb"" in the same manner. Tzowu (talk) 23:00, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Both of you seem to be getting a bit heated over what can be solved with little digging. He was one of the finest military commanders in WWI. According to (http://www.austro-hungarian-army.co.uk/) which seems like a weak source. You statement "the greatest in Croatian history was a Serb by birth" seems unsourced and odd to state and also seems you are accusing the other editor of being against Serbs. Strange that on the Ivo Andrić page, his Croatian origin is not so highly stressed, but how he declared himself. He also being the most renowned writer in Serbian literature, a person of Croat origin. In fact when someone mentions his ethnicity and him calling himself a ethnic Serb is irrelevant, they get attacked. Also here is another source that states he is Croat by birth. Also being from a Serb majority area doesn't make him automatically Serbian nor do we go by statistical probability but by cited references and RS. If there are a number of sources stating he was of Serb origin and Croat origin, then let us state it out of respect for the reader.OyMosby (talk) 23:26, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I know my history, and not every comment or personal opinion on the TP must be referenced. On the other hand there is no dispute that he is/was of Serb origin. Sources from Croatia are claiming the same thing. RS are not disputed here. I can add book pages and I'm not accusing anyone of anything, please. I still do not see what is combined in the article and what exactly is wrong. Even the quote by fringe linguist and nationalist Grčević (with his usual set of rants about "Greater Serb agression" and other forms of hate speech and POV) - states that he was of Serbian Orthodox fate. I shall not delete Grčević yet, as we are currently discussing. Where is the elaboration for this newly added tag? This whole "issue" looks like a case of Nationalization of history. Current wording is perfect, it states his origin and how he considered himself and quotes the man himself and lead is fine as well.

Everyhing is textbook Wikipedia:Neutral point of view with all key data presented - Boroević (Serbo-Croatian Cyrillic: Бороевић) was of Serb descent. Boroević himself stated that he was a Croat and that Croatia was his homeland, and is often referred to as "Croatian". and he considered his family to be Croatians.Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 23:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

None of the sources I provided are Croatian or Balkan for that matter. I am simply providing sources that state either Croat by Birth, or Croat in general in the Austro-Hungarian military. I made sure not to use Balkan sources so as to avoid potential biases. I don't doubt your sources just providing the counter sources. However saying his source of origin being undisputed is not actually true based on my provided sources, which again are non-Balkan. Perahps a part after his Serb origin it can be added stating some historian state him to be of Croat origin? As I said, being that sources show he is of Serb or Croat descent, both can be mentioned in the article. Two of the sources I provided dub him of Croat origin or ethnic Croat. Cheers. OyMosby (talk) 00:34, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Neither are new sources which I have added. I don't care how he considered himself, he could be a jedi knight for all I care, the sources speak louder then words. What you are saying/proposing could mostly go under and is often referred to as "Croatian" part. There is no doubt about Boroević's ethnic backgroung, only in some fringe nationalistic circles which want to present notable Serbs of Croatia a sort of Orthodox-Vlach-floating mass or Orthodox Croats; Grčević is one of those guys. Not to mentioned that he was acused of various of breaking studend laws and nationalisation of studies of Croatian language by a vast majoriry of students. I shall remove his work as a source in this article (he is a linguist by the way). In fact, Boroević was a Serb on both sides; his distant cousins Boroević Branko and Slavko were major Partisan Serb figures of WW2 from the region of Banija. His father Adam Boroević, has a smaller Serbian Orthodox church as his endowment. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 01:42, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

How are Western scholars “nationalist fringe circles”? How can you say there is no doubt of his ethnicity? There is a strong case for Gandulić being a Croat yet I would never claim it is absolute %100 fact. One can make a solid argument about Serbofication of Croat individuals by Serbian nationalist circles as well. But this is a ridiculous topic to bring up to me when I presented NON CROAT SOURCES. Wikipedia I DONT LIKE IT and “I know the facts” is not a valid argument. You claim to know your history, well guess what? Many historians who know their history disagree with you and agree with you. How can you ignore Western sources and decide what is “notable”? Doesn’t seem to be too many more sources saying he is of Ethnic Serb origin than ones saying Croat origin omce looking into the citations. Doesn’t matter what you personally wish to believe. You asked the other editor is it an issue if he is Serbian? I could ask you is it an issue if he was Croatian given the sources? This whole issue of ethnic origins is astounding in these Balkan articles. I tried to be fair and have both ethnic origins to be stated. Sadko, some of the sources you posted are Balkan however. Also a number of the sources you state claim him of Serb origin either do not mention his Serb origin but simply label him as Serb or don't mention ethnicity at all. Only 2 or 3 state Serb ethnic origin. The other editor is right this is WP:SYN as you are including sources that don’t back up the Serb origin claim. Half of them simply say Serb by identity not specifically ancestry. The rest should be in the "refereed to as Serb" section. Yet sources I provide that say he is a Croat you say are not origin based. What does Grčević have to do with my sources? I didn’t say anything about what the subject labels himself as. Nothing to do with what I said. Though again Ivo Andrić’s self description is seen as gospel on his page. I agree that sources should speak for themselves. Two non Balkan sources state Croatian origin. Look at the two sources I put after the Croatian origin mention. Neither are Balkan (Though there are credible Serbian and Croatian sources too but they shouldn’t be deemed credible just because they validate a view). They state origin not what he is labeled as. I don’t really see much more to say here. As we both agree, the sources should speak for themselves. OyMosby (talk) 01:47, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

1) They are not, I was speaking only about locals. One should check and double check such sources. They form a minority (we are talking about sources stating that state "of Croat ethnic origin" "Croat by birth" etc.). One can not make such an argument, as there are very few such cases, for example Josip Jelačić was never declared a Serb or anything alike. I don't have the time to dig sources which claim that he was one of the finest military commander of his time, maybe some time later, that would be good. Most of the sources already present state Serb ethnic origin, as does the book which I have posted in my previous post. Andrić is not an argument per WP:WHATABOUTX. Okay, say that we make a formulation - He was of Serb or Croat origin. And then I can add information that his father Adam was a Serbs who financed a Serbian Orthodox church as his endowment. Furthemore, I have the information that Boroevićs settled on Banija only in XVII century and that they were Christian Orthodox. Such version would go all over the place and it would make very little sense in the end. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 12:08, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

The current text Boroević was of Serb descent. While some posit he is of Croat descent. is contradictory, bad grammar, and seriously affected by citation overkill. I suggest to simplify it to Boroević has been described as being of Serb or Croat descent. and reducing the number of references. I think four of the best non-Balkan sources – two each way - should be sufficient. --T*U (talk) 14:09, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Boroević was Serb descent. We cannot put this in the article because there is no historical information who speak of him as a Serb. How you do not understand that he is not Serb and information about that do not exist. He is a Croat, he spoke of himself as a Croat as well about his family. For this reason, we must have all sources which speak of his origin(Serbian or Croatian). Serbian, and partly, Croatian historiography established his origin according to the Orthodox faith and this was transmitted partially by foreign sources. For this reason we cannot make a Serb from a Croat because Orthodoxy has nothing to do with Serbs. You did the same thing with Josip Runjanin where his daughter says they are Croats and we have an article where he is a Serb. No historical information on planet earth speaks of him(Josip Runjanin) as a Serb but on Wikipedia he is a Serb. I don't know who is promoting this and why? Then we have Sokollu Mehmed Pasha who is a Serb although there is no historical information which speaks of him as a Serb. Then comes a new book from Marie-Janine Calic, The Great Cauldron from 2019, in which she says that Sokollu Mehmed Pasha is Bosnian. I don't know what else she could write, she probably read the wikipedia 100 times and knows wikipedia fact that Sokollu Mehmed Pasha is Serb but she writes in the book that he is Bosnian. It is a fact-based history, that's what I talking about earlier(2019) and she confirmed that I was right. And now I'm right, but someone is forcing their own history. Who is next Croat, who is actually a Serb? Mikola22 (talk) 15:05, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Your fringe theories are not of merit. Any historian would burst out laughing if he/she was to hear "no original documents" rant. Sokollu Mehmed Pasha is WP:WHATABOUTX and not an argument. In fact there is a letter by Pasha himself calling his language Serbian. Let me guess, Serbs do not speak Serbian? IHe is Bosnian as he was born in Bosnia, the same way someone born in Slavonia is Slavonian. Mikola22, please stop pointing fingers at other editors for your own failures which had serious consequences. Giving "we VS you" comments is not helping your position. @OyMosby: I understand that your edit was in good faith and that you want to be as neutral as possible, but your last edit was not good at all. Such edits should not made while there is ongoing discussion. Plus there are other issues, like grammar and style. The facts are: 1) Most sources credit his origin to be Serbian. 2) His father has financed construction of one Serbian Orthodox church 3) Even Croatian sources claim that he and his family are Serb. 4) Boroevics from WW2 were Serb partisans. What is unclear here? I shall add all this information later, after we finish disucssing. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 17:15, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for historical information in which Josip Runjanin speaks of himself as a Serb. You said you had this informations, but to this day nothing is happening. In fact there is a letter by Pasha himself calling his language Serbian. There is also information that Pasha was caught in Hrvati (Croats) (his personal words). Why he's not a Croatian? The Great Cauldron, book from 2019. The Ottoman grand vizier with Bosnian roots had an imperial biography that was typical for his time. In 1565 the Bosnian was named grand vizier. The Croatian writer Marin Držić (Marin Držić (1508 – 2 May 1567) was a Croatian writer from Republic of Ragusa) wrote that because the vizier “is part of our language and people . . . and our Bosnian blood, we ought not to hesitate . . . to keep him as our friend. Otherwise, Sadko sure you can hide behind wikipedia rules and it is essential, but you can't dispute me in some forum or anywhere else because I stick to the original historical data and it is stronger than steel. I'm not asking that for Svetozar Boroević original historical documents are respected because we know the rules of wikipedia ie RS rules. I'm asking to keep all RS data in the article. Those who say that he is a Serb and those who say that he declares himself as a Croat, that he considered his family as Croatians etc. Why hide it? We are hiding this precisely because it is evident that sources referring to his Serbian origin have no basis. Mikola22 (talk) 19:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

WP:Wikipedia is not about winning, WP:No personal attacks, WP:Fringe theories, WP:Wikipedia is not a forum, WP:Spam. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 19:45, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Most sources credit his origin to be Serbian. And what this has to do with the sources which say that he considered himself a Croat? His father has financed construction of one Serbian Orthodox church What does this prove? In Croatia only the Serbian Orthodox Church exists. Even Croatian sources claim that he and his family are Serb Yes, and what it has to do with the sources which say that he considered himself a Croat and which are based on original historical data? What are we supposed to do, hide as in the article about Josip Runjanin? Boroevics from WW2 were Serb partisans. What is unclear here? The vast majority of Orthodox, upon entering America 100 years ago, declared themselves under race as Croats. Some of them coming from places where Serbian schools, Serbian Orthodox Church exist and very few declared themselves as Serbs. It was some fifty or forty years before World War II. These people do not consider themselves Serbs. It's a historical fact, not to mention the time before that. Mikola22 (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

As a passer-by, I'm not sure how anyone can argue for the exclusion of any mention of Boroević's Serb ethnicity, given that Sadko provided three non-Serbian secondary sources pointing to him being an ethnic Serb (Palmer, Horvat & Schindler). As far as I'm aware the only Eastern Orthodox Church in Croatia was the Serbian one until the Ustashe formed the short-lived "Croatian Orthodox Church" during World War II. Arguing that he was Orthodox but not Serb therefore seems disingenuous. The term "of Serb descent" is also confusing and WP:SYNTH. Either both of his parents are Serb, only one is, or both are Croats and he has some Serbian lineage. This should be specified based on RS if possible. TU-nor's suggestion is the most reasonable. State that some sources view him as a Serb and how if possible. State that others view him as a Croat. Then state that he viewed himself as a Croat. Cut it down to two or three sources for each claim. --Griboski (talk) 22:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with the notion by editor Mikola22 that his Serb origin is to not be included. This is a ridiculous claim that seems extremely biased in trying to remove any Serb identity from the subject. A number of sources supports Serb origin and there are some sources support Croat origin. ” Arguing that he was Orthodox but not Serb therefore seems disingenuous.” This claim is disingenuous. Slavic identity still was fluid during his time. Being Orthodox doesn’t make one automatically Serb. There was the East Orthodox Church as well. TU-nor stated that there was no separate Serbian Orthodox Church at the time in past edit, though I don’t know that is for sure. And what if mixed ethnicity? Serb automatically? Are Serb Catholics, a number of which existed in Dubrovnik, just Croats and only Croats are Catholic? Of course not. One of the non-Balkan sources even labels him Croat Orthodox. Doubt the historian is an Ustasha. However it is more likely that an Orthodox person is probably a Serb, yes but not %100. Personal research is irrelevant though. The sources are what matter. There are sources claiming both Serb or Croat origin. A number of the sources used to cite him as ethnic Serb in the article, do not actually state his ethnicity as so but his identity, similar to sources calling him Croatian. I think @TU-nor: TU-nor's proposal makes most sense. The subject is more likely of Serb than Croat descent but there are sources claiming both so both should be mentioned. Sources streamlined as well. Seems three editors are in agreement.OyMosby (talk) 00:09, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@OyMosby my suggestion is to put all the sources, that he is a Serb and that he is a Croat. Sources who speak of him as a Serb can be a million but sources which speak of him as a Croat can only be five. Difference between these sources is that his Croatian origin and Croatian origin of his family is based on his statements ie historical data. I wrote that vast majority of Orthodox 100 years ago(migration to America) declared as Croats part as Austrians and Hungarians the least considered themselves Serbs under Race and we must respect their decision. You have to know that there are Croats of Orthodox religion in Croatia as well. In Varaždin Generalate more than half population are Croatian serfs etc which also convert to Orthodoxy, probably part of the Croats in the Turkish territory converted to Orthodoxy as well. They are not automatically Serbs because they are Orthodox. Not viewing these facts is a denial of Croatian history and creation from part of the Croats some kind of Serbs. For this reason RS who say that he is a Serb and a Croat must be in the article. That all know this fact. We cannot from a man who speaks of himself and his family as Croats only create a Serbian origin fact. I guess his will and RS who talk about it must respect. Mikola22 (talk) 06:12, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

No comment, it's not worth it. On the other hand, He is often referred to as "Croatian" part is now completely redundant and seems repetitive. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 11:03, 17 April 2020 (UTC)