Template talk:National symbols of Serbia

Criteria

Who set criteria for including something into this template? Vanjagenije (talk) 16:13, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I'd be interested to hear that as well...--Avala (talk) 11:03, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, lets see it! :)

For more ideas, please see:

National Symbols of Pakistan

National Symbols of Poland

National Symbols of Hungary

National Symbols of Sweden

National Symbols of Uruguay

National Symbols of Brazil

National Symbols of Macedonia

National Symbols of Thailand

National Symbols of Australia With great page there.

Also, this may help.

Template:National symbols

So, after all of this, what do you propose, guys? What should we add here. and how? --WhiteWriter ^speaks 19:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I propose to delete the "People" section, as I think no person can be considered a "national symbol of Serbia". Vanjagenije (talk) 20:18, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Sure, that is logic... Next? :) --WhiteWriter ^speaks 22:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with Vanjagenije. I really don't see how a person, no matter how historically significant, can be considered a national symbol... thats just weird. Also the "places" section really just belittles other less well known places in Serbia. Buttons (talk) 02:28, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

New proposition

Also, i created National symbols of Serbia, we should see what else to include there and in this template! :) --WhiteWriter ^speaks 12:21, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

I heard that St Sava is the patron saint of Serbian schools, but I never heard that he is the patron saint of Serbia. Is there some evidence for this? Vanjagenije 19:00, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Vanja, i am searching also! Not good sources, but just on the information level...

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=12620.0

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_is_the_patron_saint_of_Serbia

http://www.stsavanyc.org/english/events/2006_01_StSava.html

And few more! :) --WhiteWriter ^speaks 17:06, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Better version

Why is this version reverted?

• Cultural icons: As in other articles
• Monuments: World Heritage sites and Cathedral of Saint Sava
• People: If being depicted on the currency, why wouldn't these persons be symbols of Serbia?

--Jebacz (talk) 03:21, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I Agree -- WhiteWriter ^speaks 09:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

This version is reverted not because it's bad, but because we have to make a consensus first, before making such a radical change. Personally, I agree with monuments and persons, but I can hardly agree that cevapcici and pljeskavica are national symbols of Serbia, nor can I agree with wolves and eagles being national symbols. User:Vanjagenije 11:30, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Please see the National symbol article. --Jebacz (talk) 12:46, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Guys, what the heck are you doing? Stop edit warring. Vanja, i don't agree with you. dishes and animals are national symbols. We may see more at the main article about this. Also, you may present new ideas about dishes, as i really think that this is ours most known ones. Please, explain your reasoning. --WhiteWriter ^speaks 14:21, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Criteria issues with some of the symbols that were listed

1. Official language is not the official symbol of any country, nor that is the case with Serbian as the official symbol of Serbia. Constitution of Serbia defines official symbols of the country in the Article 7 as flag (Civil flag and State flag), coat of arms (as Greater coat of arms and Lesser coat of arms) and the anthem. Language per se is neither an unofficial symbol of country in sense that is not an emblematic symbol, it is official language of a country and that's it.

2. Stefan Nemanja is not considered father of the Serbian nation but Karađorđe and Miloš Obrenović - those two are founding fathers of a modern Serbian nation. Nation as a concept didn't even exist in the High Middle Ages when Stefan Nemanja lived. Stefan Nemanja is a founder of Nemanjić dinasty and one of the most consequential rulers in Serbian history but that doesn't mean that he is a father of the nation, which again as a concept didn't even exist in his time.

3. Serbian art: there are three art pieces that are emblematic and have place in Serbian national psyche: White Angel fresco, the Kosovo Maiden and the Migration of the Serbs paintings. What are criteria for the The Proclamation of Dušan's Law Codex painting? Is it present and recognized among wider public as defining national artwork and symbol? What that one sets apart from pieces of, for example, Nadežda Jovanović or Petar Lubarda?

4. Wild boar is not perceived as national animal of Serbia whatsoever. It is not present in national psyche nowhere as much as wolf.

5. Endless listing of monuments and locations: there's no point in listing so many monuments and locations. What is the importance of Kapetanovo and Fantast castles in nation-wide sense, or Stari Grad Užice? There are so many buildings with great importance, why should we stop at Patriarchate buildings in Belgrade and Karlovci - why are they more significant than Saborna Church in Belgrade or Žiča and Ravanica monasteries? There is a proverb: less is more - smaller quantity often could be of higher quality. Klačko (talk) 13:01, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

I will also mention and discuss some of the changes you made at the main National symbols of Serbia page, since in your haste to copy-paste the same arguments you have forgotten to place your signature on that discussion topic. I am not fixing that one for you as it is not my place to add your signature and its unnecessary to split discussions up when they are related to both the main article and template pages.

There was a mention about official symbols of the country, but only the state flag is placed in the official symbols section. The civil flag (tricolor) and the standard flags (used by the President of the Republic and President of the National Assembly) should also be placed in the official section as they are all marked as official symbols of the Republic of Serbia by its constitution, along with the anthem and coat of arms (greater and lesser).

Wild boar was and still is used as a heraldic symbol related to the Serbian people through the Triballian Boar. It was part of the Serbian Uprising flag and was used to symbolize the Serbs during late Ottoman period (look up some maps and national personifications and you would see Serbia and the Serbs depicted with the Triballian boar). It is still a heraldic symbol in many municipalities in Šumadija region (see the greater coat of arms of Voždovac and Lapovo, Lajkovac, Kragujevac, Velika Plana, Topola and Barajevo), just like the European wolf (see the greater coat of arms of Žagubica, Merošina and Kučevo) and the double-headed eagle. In fact its the second most represented heraldic animal after the eagle (both represented in sable and supporter sections of heraldry). The removal of this is the most oddest choice you have made as the case against its inclusion is barely a case at all, given the mountain of evidence over the symbolic significance of the wild boar in Serbia.

In the oak section, you have only mentioned the penduculate/English oak as the national tree, which is not entirely correct. It is oaks in general that have cultural and religious significance. Just by looking at the zapis section of wikimedia you will see that all kinds of oaks are used for religious purposes, not just the English one.

There also several minor edits that are questionable, especially this edit. The inclusion of the Serbian translation for almost every section is unnecessary, especially if only Latin alphabet is used, disregarding the Cyrillic one (which is also the one used officially for government matters). Should only be included in sections that require a translation like the motto and anthem. Its interesting you added information about the use of the Serbian eagle on national football teams, but removed similar mentions for the oak, wolf, and boar on official flags and coat of arms of municipalities and/or northern autonomous region. Those removals should be reverse.

If I dont mention other points of contention, its ether because I agree with them or just accept their removal. The latter reason is ether because its a matter of personal opinion if a piece of artistic work or a location should be added in or not, agreeing with keeping the template and article pages cleaner, and/or not the actually original editor who added them in so I have no real attachment in their removal. Nickpunk (talk) 21:17, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

First of all, glad we're having a constructive dialogue.

Secondly, these are not a copy-paste arguments, as these are related only to the changes made on the Template. Argumentation on the Main Page Talk Page is more substantial and thorough and accordingly related to the changes made in that article.

As for your arguments:

1. I agree with you about generalization of oak and not sticking to the specifities of the penduculate oak. I agree with your edit about zapis - it's a nice addition.

2. I also agree that Serbian translation for every section is unnecessary, I'll correct that.

3. Official symbols are those sanctioned by the Constitution in the Article 7. You are right about the civil flag, there's an argument for it to be listed as well, alongside the state flag. However I think it's more appropriate to indirectly link it through the National colours, and mentioned it there, just to evade having the official symbols section with too many details and images. We would then have there the lesser coat of arms as well and it would lead to somewhat "congested" section. As for the presidential standards they are not national symbols but symbols of the offices of the President of the Republic and the President of the National Assembly.

4. Tribalian boar is not a heraldic symbol of that importance in Serbian history to be placed on a par with double-headed eagle or even Serbian cross. It was never part of the official coat of arms of modern Serbia, neither it was part of coat of arms of medieval Serbian Kingdom or Empire. It was part of flag and coat of arms during the First Serbian Uprising for less than 10 years (I think we don't really need to point to that short-lived 18th-century Habsburg crownland bizarrely called Kingdom of Serbia and its coat of arms) and that's about it. Tribalian boar was shown on numerous 16th- to 18th-century armorials (albeit mostly Illyrian), so what? Just for the record, those Illyrian armorials compiled from mainly fictional medieval coats of arms... Does that makes Tribalian boar equal to the double-headed eagle which is in almost continuous use by state, be it medieval Serbian state or modern Serbian state? Argument about being depicted on numerous municipalities' coat of arms is, in my opinion, not valid, as we have numerous other animals and other depictions (dragons, horses, etc.), and even on that local level double-headed eagle is much more common than Tribalian boar. Don't get me wrong, Tribalian boar is Serbian heraldic symbol, but it is just not as important as other (double-headed eagle, Serbian cross). Point is, we don't need endless lists of all the possible national symbols, monuments, traditions etc. but compile those that are the most important and emblematic. I believe that for articles such as the National symbols of Serbia the best approach is "Less is more - lesser the quantity leads to better quality". I am fine for Tribalian boar to be presented in the Template section alongside double-headed eagle and Serbian cross, as the Template should not be as restrictive as the Main Page.

Regards Klačko (talk) 11:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC)