User talk:Berto456

Berto456, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Berto456! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cullen328 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:05, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Flag of Ragusan Republic

I'm sorry but the svg version of a flag is always better than a png for flags (see: Commons:Media for cleanup). Moreover Flag of Republic of Ragusa.svg has a good source, insted the flag with gold borders is not real. The depiction od Saint Blaise is very accurate in fact it come form File:Sveti Vlaho s brodskog barjaka.jpg.Please revert the previous version--Facquis (talk) 09:14, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

(copy of my reply)

Following your suggestion, I uploaded a .svg version of the files.

Your depiction of the image of Saint Blaise is your own design inspired by a historical image, while my version is one of the original depictions of Saint Blaise used in Dubrovnik. Here are a few examples to illustrate this: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]

In fact, if you visit Dubrovnik, go to the sacristry of the church of St. Blaise and ask for a small flag of St. Blaise, and you will get the same design I have (with the exception of the color of the inside of the cape, which is blue in the original used by the Republic, and brown in their flag).

As for the gold border, here is a photograph of a flag used during the Feast of Saint Blaise in Dubrovnik: [12]

Berto456 (talk) 11:36, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Template:Dubrovnik nobility sidebar

Hello, Berto456,

According to your reverted edit, here is my answer:

First, it's you, who started reverting previous edits without explanations.

Second, you should have had a consensus on the Talk page of the article before reverting.

Third, in the Republic of Dubrovnik/Republic of Ragusa Latin was the official language, whereas Croatian and Italian were commonly used in everyday communication. Family names in Croatian were not only „a sort of nicknames or pseudonyms“, as you said, but, according to different descent, members od Dubrovnik nobility used various versions of their family names. Mr. Gozze has the right to call himself Gozze, not Gučetić. And Mr.Vekarić has the right to express his opinion based on facts. But there are also other opinions, facts, sources, evidences... Therefore, the people from Dubrovnik have and had the right to have their names appear in versions they preferred. For instance, there was an official agreement between Dubrovnik and Bulgarian Emperor Michael II Asen dated 15 June 1253, in which the most family names of Dubrovnik nobility were written in Croatian/Slavic version (sources: Irmgard Mahnken: „Das Ragusanische Patriziat des XIV. Jahrhunderts“ from 1960; [13], Josip Lučić: „O dubrovačkom patricijatu u XIV. stoljeću [14]). Furthermore, there were book covers, mostly printed in Venice or Rome, with old Croatian/Slavic version of names of the authors, e.g. Gundulić, Držić, Palmotić, Bunić-Vučić, Džamanjić etc. ([15], [16], [17], [18], [19] [20]).

Therefore, we cannot perceive the names of Dubrovnik noble houses only from one side, unilaterally. And you cannot revert all the family names (except Vodopić and Zlatarić) into Italian, of your own. The stable version of the sidebar had a combination of both Croatian and Italian. Let it be so in the future. I could also say that "if you continue reverting, I will have to report it", but I won't. So far. Let's solve the problem without reporting. Peacefully. OK? --Silverije 21:19, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

(copy of my reply)

It is not true that I reverted previous edits without an explanation. As anyone can check in the history of the article, I gave an explanation for my edit in the description and I linked to the article by Historian Vekarić.

It is of course true that several Ragusan authors used the Slavic versions of their last names in their literary works. That, however, is not official usage (which is why Vekarić uses the term "pseudonym"). It is also true that the Ragusan nobility in Medieval times used a Slavic version of their last names in several contracts signed with their Slavic neighbors in their particular language and Cyrillic script. This was an adaptation to their customs, it is indeed official but limited to those circumstances. Only the Romance versions of their last names were official in the Republic and in every other circumstance.

But since you do have a point that the Slavic version was used in an official capacity in the circumstances mentioned above, I will agree to a compromise and rewrite the template to include both versions, with preference given to the version which was official in the Republic and was used the most (a few examples with the Slavic version do not trump the rest of the State Archives). This is also more practical and easier to navigate for non speakers, since most of the articles linked to in the template use the Romance version anyway.

P.S. I originally left Vodopić and Zlatarić in their Slavic form because that was the official form they used in all documents (it was actually "Vodopich" and "Slatarich" in Ragusan orthography). BTW, it is a mistake to simply equate the Romance version with Italian because those Romance names which originated in the City before the late 15th century were in the Romance Old Ragusan language spoken by the population of the City until that time.

Berto456 (talk) 02:28, 31 October 2019 (UTC)