Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Croatia/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Universities in Croatia

Article Croatia#Education and Template:Croatian universities say that Croatia have 8 universities but I think that hr:Hrvatsko katoličko sveučilište also have status of independent university and I am not sure what is status of Evanđeoski teološki fakultet in Osijek?--MirkoS18 (talk) 17:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

According to their website "Evanđeoski teološki fakultet" is officially called "Visoko Evanđeosko Teološko Učilište" and it does not seem to be affiliated with any university.

As for Hrvatsko katoličko sveučilište, I'm not sure about their status. They have no university faculties listed as belonging to it. They launched in 2010 with three undergraduate programmes and have enrolled their first generation of graduate students in 2013. Timbouctou (talk) 18:19, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

There are three private universities per this source [1]: Croatian Catholic University, Dubrovnik International University and Media University in Split. But there is no info for "Visoko Evanđeosko Teološko Učilište" since it seems they are not accredited at the moment.--MirkoS18 (talk) 14:57, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

That's interesting. HKS is definitely private, and although billed as a "university" it does not have the scope nor organisational structure similar to other universities. As for Media University in Split - never heard of that one before, and judging by the link you gave they don't even have a website. However, there is something called medijsko sveučilište with buildings in Koprivnica and Varaždin. So I assume the one in Split is probably their new branch. In any case, these are all quite obscure even by local standards. Timbouctou (talk) 01:08, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Radmilo Armenulić

The article Radmilo Armenulić includes the following sentence: He was the coach of the province Niderzahsen. I assume Niedersachsen is meant. But I have never heard of a German state tennis coach. sr:Нидерзахсен is a redlink so I can't deduce anything from there. Any ideas? Agathoclea (talk) 10:34, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

x-posted from WT:TENNIS#Radmilo Armenulić please respond there.
(Maybe someone who can read Serbian can work out the backlinks to sr:Нидерзахсен - I can't get the display to go English.)Agathoclea (talk) 10:39, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Croatia - recent articles and the home page

I don't think I'll be maintaining the list of recent articles any longer. Its utility is perhaps outweighed by tediousness of updating it by hand, day after day. I didn't mind that at all, but I suppose most people would find it pointless. Maybe it should be killed off.

And, while we're on the subject of the WP Cro home page design in general, a while ago I was asked what could be done to move things forward for WP Serbia, and, among other things, I said (User_talk:Antidiskriminator/Archive_6#Re:_WPS):

The project's main page is important. Looking at it, I'd say I'd try to make it more compact, while still keeping the full detail in subpages.

And they did just that: the home page, which used to look quite busy, just like ours does, has been redesigned to be - in my opinion - much simpler, cleaner, and more aesthetically appealing. What do you say? GregorB (talk) 21:35, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Personally, I like the layout used by Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history, offering something actually readable. Top tabs need not be there if that's complicated to do (I don't know that bit), the sidebar is just fine. WPCRO might benefit from article alerts instead of the "How is our project organized?" used over there, but not necessarily so. I know that layout is somewhat different from most projects, but I think it's better suited to appeal to potential new editors instead of being a "hub" oriented at regulars - but I trust WPCRO might benefit from fresh blood as well. Thoughts?--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:20, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree a redesign is in order, the tabbed layout looks like a much better way of keeping clutter away from the main page. The main page should only contain the most important bits and tools needed for new editors to get started and for old editors to pick up new projects. I suggest carefully picking colours for the new layout, I am against the flashy reds and pinks for achieving good readability. I don't mind dropping the recent articles box - if it can't be automated then we don't really need it. I would also love a new logo, something less serious than a simple flag and coat of arms, maybe something akin to WP:Iceland logo. The list of participants, article alerts and templates can be safely moved to other tabs, and the To Do List needs to be streamlined. That's just my 2 cents. Timbouctou (talk) 02:43, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Funny thing about WP Iceland - didn't notice it, but I've always liked the WP:Sweden logo, turns out they are based on an identical theme. I sort of liked our coat of arms (even if it did look a bit too serious) but was not thrilled with the flag in the banner as it didn't look too distinctive, particularly at that size. If there is a general agreement about the logo, we might ask the original artist to create something of the kind...

Tabbed display (or sidebars, doesn't matter) with a reasonably compact main page is the way to go IMO. The main page should explain the project to newcomers (without going into too much detail right there) and also serve as a "command center" that displays the current state of the project and recent events (also without going into details). Article alerts are great - the problem is that they are also unwieldy in a fixed-size layout. (Todo list has the same problem, with the benefit of being at least more or less a constant size.) Maybe we should look around a bit, there are quite a few projects with tabbed home pages now so surely we'll find something that would work for us. GregorB (talk) 10:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it seems that there are no ready-made, "turnkey" tabbed main pages, so one needs to either "steal" from an existing project or to create something from the ground up by using e.g. {{start tab}}. While I'm not volunteering, I might still do it one day if I'm bored enough (and if the project decides so, of course).

Changing the logo would be much easier, but it seems that the original author of the above mentioned logos isn't around and I'm not sure whom to ask about it. GregorB (talk) 20:35, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

The logo isn't that hard to make. I certainly can make one just like that. Is there a consensus to apply similarly tilted flag (not sure if arms would work) into such circular shape with circular gradient shading? If so I could make one - though not before the next week since I'm up to my eyes in RL work until at least mid-week. I'm also not sure I have the exact same font available, but if that's alright I'll use a similar one. If everyone concerned is alright with such an arrangement, I can make the logo (late next week presumably) and post it on the Commons for review and subsequent amendments. Heavy "borrowing" from other projects is certainly an option as far as the project page design is concerned, IMO.--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:42, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, why wait. How about this one? it's all vectors with transparent background. Of course, consider it a draft open for all kinds of suggestions for improvements.--Tomobe03 (talk) 23:09, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Whoa! It's excellent! GregorB (talk) 09:49, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Here is the project banner preview. Looks like the image is a bit too tall, so perhaps we'll need a wattle-less version here? GregorB (talk) 11:24, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Added two alternative solutions saving vertical space (above) - one wattle-less and another um... different one.--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:36, 31 January 2014 (UTC)::

Personally, I don't think removal of the wattle from the original proposal would make much difference in terms of vertical space needed (about 2-3 mm on a regular sized notebook screen for project banners), but I'm open to suggestions otherwise.--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:40, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Great job Tomobe03! I would personally prefer the wattle-less version, with maybe thin lines just above and under the "WikiProject Croatia" text, like the ones used in the Swedish version. It improves readability when put in context of a project banner as it separates the logo from article rating boxes. Timbouctou (talk) 11:46, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I'll make one like that in a moment... hang on--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:51, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Sandbox now updated with the wattle-less version. Not a big difference indeed, but I'd say it looks slightly better. How about wattle (possibly lighter if necessary) running horizontally in the background of the "WikiProject Croatia" rectangle? This won't work in the banner, but might be OK for larger sizes. And yeah, lines might help in the banner version... GregorB (talk) 11:52, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

With or without the lines?--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:11, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

The lines-less version is now available (see top of this section) - the wattle there isn't gray, it's 67% transparent. I agree that the lines improve appearance of the logo in the banner. As far as project page logo is concerned, the lines are not as necessary since the logo is inherently larger. Personally, I'd preferr the version with the wattle running underneath the logo. Of course, any other version is fine by me as well.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:19, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Agree on all points. Wattle in the background and text don't really go together. Lines, no wattle = banner; wattle, no lines = main page. GregorB (talk) 12:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Sounds great! Timbouctou (talk) 12:44, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

We're in agreement then.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:57, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Very good. Does anyone object to being bold and introducing the new logos right away? GregorB (talk) 16:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Given the weeklong discussion here and response to it (as well as lack thereof), I think it's safe to assume that'd be okay.--Tomobe03 (talk) 18:22, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Done. Might take a while for changes to propagate. I did not change {{User WikiProject Croatia}}, though, as the new logo does not work at that size (might work without the text, though). BTW, is that font Linux Libertine? GregorB (talk) 19:05, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Let's tinker with the userbox once the page redesign is clearer than today - in terms of colour schemes etc. The font is somewhat older than Linux Libertine - it's Calisto MT. I chose that one because of its appearance, I had to go back to saved file to check name of the font as I never gave it a glance.--Tomobe03 (talk) 19:15, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks... Fine work, once again! GregorB (talk) 20:22, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Kingdom of Croatia (925–1102)‎ and Croatia in the union with Hungary dispute

Can someone take a look at these articles and the ongoing dispute between DIREKTOR and everyone else? The dispute is regarding the nature of the union between Hungary and Croatia. The mentioned user believes there is some ongoing ambiguity regarding the union but we have plenty of evidence and sources stating just the opposite, both Hungarian and third party sources clearly state the view of modern historiography is that there was a personal or rather dynastic union...so we are talking about a dominant thesis. I've tried to supplant the articles with over two dozen sources but that all doesn't seem enough for the person in question. Despite being challenged by several users (including myself) he maintains his version is the consensus despite the fact he changed and adapted it to his own views only recently. I've tried to discuss with him extensively on talk pages of those articles but the discussion always reverts to a mere squabble after a few replies. I was thinking of starting a mediation/arbitration process but before that I'd like to see if someone here has some ideas how to resolve this ridiculous issue. Shokatz (talk) 14:14, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I've taken a brief look and it seems that the main problem is you wish to expand more on the historiographical nature of the union while user Direktor prefers a toned mention of the issue. I honestly don't see anything wrong with the facts either of you present, but I believe delving into the nature of the personal union should not be so, how do I say this...extreme?

I'm sorry to see this edit warring going on in such a fashion for so many weeks. If you want my honest opinion, I am leaning more towards Direktor's reasoning. If everyone can agree to stop reverting the page for at least a couple of days while others here have time to review and comment, that would be helpful.--Jesuislafete (talk) 06:04, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Actually I would prefer the toned down versions as well such as it was before [2] [3], it was the other user who came and made changes [4] [5] going into extreme on the personal union issue (which I especially consider inappropriate on the Kingdom of Croatia (925–1102)) and furthermore giving an undue weight on the (what I see it as) minority view. All I did was trying to balance the added content and making it reflect the sources. There is an elaborate discussion on both talk pages. My intention here was not to present my POV (although perhaps I went a bit overboard with the original post) but to invite other users who could contribute to the discussion and possibly help to diffuse this ridiculous situation. Shokatz (talk) 22:52, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to User Study

Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 17:22, 7 February 2014 (UTC).

Island names

As it turns out, the Drvenik Veliki article is mistitled. But is it "Drvenik Veli"[6] or "Drvenik veli"[7]? Hr wiki says "Drvenik Veli", yet if e.g. "Dugi otok" is correct, then capital V can't be. I don't get it. Also: should the original capitalization of "Dugi otok" really be retained in English? GregorB (talk) 10:47, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

"Dugi otok" is correct in Croatian (see this - where "Dugi otok" is listed explicitly). The "otok" bit is a part of the name as can be interpreted from the yearbook and therefore in English it should be capitalised as "Dugi Otok" regardless of Croatian capitalisation. As far as Croatian capitalisation is concerned the reference provided suggests it should be "Drvenik veli". A good example of the difference of Croatian vs English capitalisation (strangely employing Drevenik Mali (and Veli) as an example is here. Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:24, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, and that makes sense to me. In Croatian there is e.g. "Male Srakane", but since "Srakane" is a proper noun, caps make sense too. So, in the Drvenik case, it seems that the Bureau of Statistics gets it right while regrettably Gazetteer gets it wrong (in terms of Croatian orthography, that is). When English spelling is concerned, it's Dugi Otok for e.g. Lonely Planet[8] and Britannica,[9] so I guess that settles it. Some articles will have to be renamed. GregorB (talk) 11:51, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Can't move it to Drvenik Veli over redirect. Ah, if only Joy were reading this... :) GregorB (talk) 12:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Popular pages tool update

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 05:01, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Mestrovic Pavilion

Hello, I just wanted to let you know that I will be modifying the existing article for the Mestrovic Pavilion and adding more information. I am new around here, so please feel free to give me pointers. Umjet (talk) 13:10, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

GNK Dinamo Zagreb

I've took some time to rewrite from the ground up five sections of the article. I don't have time to rewrite and compress the history section, and it would be nice if someone would be interested to keep on working on it (after all, it is rated as High-importance in the scope of this WikiProject), and also add the "Colours" section to replace the dreadful "Kit manufacturers". 89.172.19.79 (talk) 09:40, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Da li itko ovo moderira?!?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0titar,_Croatia

Kakve su to militantne aktivističke gluposti? Koliko god bilo odvratno to što se dogodilo jadnom psu, mislim da na wikipediji to nema šta raditi. Nekim ljudima stvarno treba oduzeti računalo! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.101.219.194 (talk) 00:21, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Minority place names?

Now that Croatia is officially posting signs in minority languages in certain towns, shouldn't articles on those towns include prominent mention of the minority name of the town? I think it should be in the lede, or in the infobox, or both. This is an issue in many Serbian articles, but the community has been trying to enforce a rule that if the minority language has official status, the minority name should be there. Why not in Croatian articles also? Brianyoumans (talk) 02:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I think minority languages are already present in infoboxes/ledes in articles about places where these are officially proscribed. Do you know of any specific ones which may have this missing? Timbouctou (talk) 02:51, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

How about Vukovar? Brianyoumans (talk) 05:03, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Vukovar is a rather unique case, in that the official status of Serbian as co-official language is disputed by the local government, but insisted upon by the central government in Zagreb. The whole thing escalated and even led to protests, described in the 2013 Anti-Cyrillic protests in Croatia article, and at the moment there is a right-wing petition for referendum pending which (absurdly) calls for minority languages to be co-official only if an ethnic minority constitutes 50% or more of the population in any given municipality or a city, raised from the current 33.3% (i.e. only in cases when the minority is actually a majority at the local level). It is unlikely that the proposal would pass, but the fact remains that local Croats are adamant in not allowing Serbian-language signs in Vukovar, which seems even more absurd since in places like Borovo, which is maybe 1 km away from Vukovar, Serbian language has been in use for years without any problems. We already had exhausting edit wars over this and adding Serbian-language name in the Vukovar article is likely to produce more. Timbouctou (talk) 11:29, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

While indeed we had rather extensive edit wars over place names, WP:V apparently settled them. The argument against Cyrillic tables is however not a legal, but rather a political argument ("we don't like it"). (I'm simplifying it slightly, but generally that's what it is.) So, both de facto and de iure, Serbian is co-official in Vukovar, and the fact that many people are opposed should be mentioned, but should not affect the lede. The question here is: does the potential harm from edit warring outweigh the encyclopedic concerns? I'm not sure, but I'd tend to say "no". GregorB (talk) 12:08, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I am also on the fence, but I would agree. Vukovar is actually a clear-cut case, regardless of the controversy. For our purposes, the difference between preconditions for co-official status as proscribed by law and actual use of this in practice is where some of the problem lies. The 1/3 of population is determined by census, but that does not make a minority language automatically official, since municipal government must file a formal decision to put this into practice, so they can set aside funds for installing roadsigns, etc. Vukovar city council actually did this in 2009, back when 2001 census figures applied (when Serbs made less than one third of population), but did nothing in practice to uphold the decision. Then, following 2011 census and the right-wing politicking, they backtracked, even though now the central government insists on this based on the same census. So government buildings in the city use bilingual signs (unless they happen to be torn down by protesters every now and then) whereas municipal buildings do not. Vukovar aside, there are many municipalities with one third of ethnic minority population, but who have never acted upon this legal provision, and even though they fit the criteria their local minority language was never officially introduced in public use. So do we go by what is "official" or do we just take census data to determine which articles should have minority placenames in the lede? Or both? Timbouctou (talk) 12:32, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

On this last issue, I'd go for actual, rather than potential status of the language, in order to steer clear of WP:OR and WP:CRYSTAL (making it also easier to defend this position, if challenged). The trend is apparently expanding,[10] so sooner or later it probably won't matter one way or the other. GregorB (talk) 13:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I would say basing it on the official national rules is the right thing to do; for one thing, figuring out whether the local authorities are supporting or implementing local signage may be difficult. And, frankly, having the Cyrillic in the Vukovar infobox would mean that Serbians who keep deleting Hungarian names from articles like Srbobran wouldn't be able to raise it as an issue any more. And suddenly there would be peace and fellowship throughout the Balkans! (Well, not really.) Brianyoumans (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

So, I'm going to say we have agreement here that adding the name in Cyrillic to the Vukovar infobox is the right thing to do? Brianyoumans (talk) 17:28, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, nothing wrong with it. Still, this is a sensitive issue so one needs to be extra cautious: it needs an inline ref, and possibly an explanatory footnote. And this is funny, since I can't find a good ref right now: the town statute[11] mentions the language issue in §61, but does not say anything on official signage. GregorB (talk) 18:38, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Now I see that Timbouctou has already added the Cyrillic to the lede; I'm satisfied with that for now, given the controversy. Brianyoumans (talk) 01:50, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Requested move notification

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:Moslem militia#Requested move, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 09:05, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Tabs

Hi all. As agreed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Croatia/Archive 4, the WP:CRO pages have been redesigned to accommodate navigation tabs, move most content from the main page to subpages and provide navigation to tools needed for effective editing. I'd like to thank Gregor and Tim for their input in particular. Of course, please drop a note here if something is misplaced or needs fixing. I'm quite confident that all previous material is retained and accessible. There's one addition, the Showcase, containing FAs, FLs, GAs and DYKs of the project. All figures and lists there are automatically calculated and transcluded or bot-maintained, therefore the page will present no additional maintenance burden for the project. Back at the archive 4, there was talk of a possible new color scheme, but since none was agreed, I kept the old one - at least until a consensus to change is reached. Happy holidays and happy editing everyone! Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 00:35, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

As I already said: great job! Haven't really looked around in great depth, but it seems everything is there and fully functional.

The main page is fully static and - while it does a much better job of presenting the project than the old one - I was wondering is there a way to make it "more interesting" to participants, not just visitors - but could not think of anything workable. The real "war room" is now the "News & open tasks" tab, and perhaps this is just as well. GregorB (talk) 21:59, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps the "war room" could be linked via a shortcut, say WP:CRO/N to facilitate a more convenient access for project regulars?--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:06, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, would not hurt surely, although I tend to use the Firefox URL bar - typing "news" is sufficient for me.

Incidentally, Frane Selak is a new DYK, currently on the Main Page. I'd like to see new DYKs being announced. We used the Recent articles box for this purpose, but I was wondering whether it would be OK to feature them from now on in the Announcements section. While a new DYK entry is not really a major event, I suppose it would still be OK, as the current rate of DYK creation is quite low (less than one per month on average). Absent that, maybe there is another way to announce them. GregorB (talk) 13:30, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

I presume that announcement of a DYK would fit nicely among, well, announcements. There are typically up to 5 announcements of any kind per month, so one extra for DYKs will be more than welcome. The bot should pick up on the DYK too in few days and add it to the showcase on its own. The announcements need be updated manually. Cheers.--Tomobe03 (talk) 14:49, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

And getting an article (DYK included) linked from the main more than merits an announcement too!--Tomobe03 (talk) 14:57, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Okay, Frane Selak DYK now announced. Also, how about moving DYKs from Recent articles to a dedicated "Did you know" subpage? Currently it wouldn't be too different from what is already provided by the bot in the Showcase page, but we could have something a bit more interesting, like a full hook archive, e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Athletics/DYK (I'd be willing to do that last step). GregorB (talk) 13:25, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

First off, a big thanks is in order to Tomobe03 for implementing changes that had been long overdue. As for a DYK archive with full hooks, that's a great idea, it would actually look interesting and inviting for people to click through, as opposed to merely listing articles. I'm not savvy enough to understand the technicalities of it, but I suggest doing something similar to this table. We could group them according to periods and put them in some collapsible format to avoid the list becoming too unwieldy. If it needs to be done manually, I can volunteer :-) Timbouctou (talk) 14:20, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. I think such a list of DYKs might be nice to have. However I believe that a list formatted in such a way would be too unwieldy for the main page no matter how short. On the other hand, there are two other options which I'd like to propose. One is a dedicated subpage, similar to the showcase offering more than alphabetical listing, or alternatively the list could replace the current (and redundant) DYK section on top of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Croatia/Recent Articles. Personally, I prefer a dedicated page for the purpose. The page could be linked from the main page - a bit of automatically maintained code can be added below FA/FL/GA count: It would start of with simple intro line on the DYK (no automatic count is possible though, AFAIK) and then a bot updated line like:

Frane Selak (2014-04-26) • Juraj Šporer (2014-04-19) • Una-class submarine (2014-03-12) • Krešimir Friedrich (2014-02-11) • Josip Palada (2014-02-11)

Unfortunately the bot produces a line below that one reading as follows:

Reached maximum of 5 out of 161 (full list)

Naturally, the "full list" is a link to the above mentioned dedicated page. An additional link to the page could be gained by adding one more slot in the Project navigation box, just below the Showcase (for instance). If the DYKs are kept in such dedicated page I'm really fine with any design, even though I'd personally go for something similar to Wikipedia:Recent additions - with a different grouping, of course, by moth or year or whichever other system appears more useful (or none at all). Thoughts?--Tomobe03 (talk) 15:28, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Here it is: Wikipedia:WikiProject Croatia/Did you know, moved out of the Recent articles subpage. This layout does not gain much compared to showcase DYK format, but I suppose we'll take it from there. WP:Recent additions looks fine to me. I don't really have a clear idea regarding the best layout. GregorB (talk) 19:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I just linked the page from the navbox, and set up bot-maintained bit for the main page in my sandbox for now - unit it is fully developed by the bot. Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:29, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

On a side note, the current list of DYKs found at the dedicated page may be inaccurate. The bot has identified 161 articles, matching the number indicated there, but I'm wondering if the contents are quite true. The bot generated list and the manual list both identify Ladislaus I of Hungary as a DYK article, yet it is not listed in the DYK archive - noticed that when I tried to idenify its hook to include it in a list here. Then I had a look at article talk history to see who added info about the DYK appearance and found this old version of the talk which seems to confirm that the article actually never appeared at the main page. I have no clue how does bot identify the entries, maybe it looks for {{DYK talk}} template. The template was added in August 2011 (five years after the supposed main page appearance) by User:WOSlinker (see diff), but I'm not sure why. Thoughts?--Tomobe03 (talk) 13:07, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I started making a list with all WP:CRO hooks in my sandbox and noticed the same thing. Ladislaus almost certainly did not make it as DYK. Also, views statistics are only available from December 2007 onwards. I was thinking of creating a full list (subdivided by periods I guess) with links to view stats at stats.grok.se, and below that a Top 10 list with ten most popular DYK's. Timbouctou (talk) 16:27, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

It seems we had just about the same idea, except I thought to have the most recent entry on top - after all, the DYKs are about what's new at a particular point. I believe the {{DYK talk}} should be removed from the Ladislaus talk page - there's nothing to support the DYK appearance claim of the article.--Tomobe03 (talk) 16:44, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Agree about Ladislaus. Btw the formatting of DYK tags changed over the years, many DYK's stretched into two datelines, and many articles have been redirected to new names since their DYK appearance, all of which makes tracking down exact views and hooks a bit more difficult than expected. Timbouctou (talk) 16:55, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Well, the hooks should be there in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Croatia/Recent Articles and since the old list contains date, I tracked the few I did process by date alone (for the same reason you said) - presumably, redirects should be in place for any changed article names. As regards the number of views, while I see that as a welcome addition, I don't consider it essential there, so if it's too time-consuming, I'd drop that bit (at least for now).--Tomobe03 (talk) 17:17, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

We don't need to include it in the comprehensive listing, but I'd like to have a record of views so we can make a top list of most popular hooks. Also, the bot seems to count articles as opposed to hooks, so the actual number of hooks is smaller as some hooks linked to more than one bolded article. Timbouctou (talk) 17:20, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes that makes sense, I did expect the bot to count articles rather than hooks. I agree that the list of a handful most popular hooks would be a nice addition. Great idea!--Tomobe03 (talk) 17:25, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

In all probability the bot simply uses the talk page category, something like this. Of course, the list is correct only on the condition that the articles are correctly tagged. Ladislaus was apparently not a DYK entry, so the new figure (160) should be correct. GregorB (talk) 19:58, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Requested move notification

Greetings! I have recently listed a requested move discussion at Talk:SS Polizei-Selbstschutz-Regiment Sandschak#Requested move, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:02, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Requested move notification

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:June Uprising in Eastern Herzegovina#Requested move, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:03, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to Participate in a User Study - Final Reminder

Would you be interested in participating in a user study of a new tool to support editor involvement in WikiProjects? We are a team at the University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within WikiProjects, and we are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visual exploration tool for Wikipedia. Given your interest in this Wikiproject, we would welcome your participation in our study. To participate, you will be given access to our new visualization tool and will interact with us via Google Hangout so that we can solicit your thoughts about the tool. To use Google Hangout, you will need a laptop/desktop, a web camera, and a speaker for video communication during the study. We will provide you with an Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 22:30, 10 May 2014 (UTC).

Croatian Regions

Started a discussion on Talk:List of regions of Croatia regarding the organization of Croatian regions on Wiki. I currently feel we have a serious mess on our hands, lots and lots of overlap, a general division that is not well sourced, and I have a sort of plan that I'd like to go through with. Seeking consensus in advance, and any sort of feedback. -- Director (talk) 17:34, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Vukosav Nikolić

Is it actually in scope of this project? I'd tend to say no. GregorB (talk) 13:12, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

He died in Slano which is in Croatia. That might give some connection with Croatia. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:43, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's about it - died on Ragusan soil, but only due to waging war there. Nothing else, so I'm removing it. GregorB (talk) 21:39, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2014

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and its sister projects. The campaign will take place throughout the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. Meetups are being held in some cities, or you can participate remotely. All constructive edits are welcome in order to contribute to Wikipedia's mission of providing quality, accurate information. Articles within Category:LGBT in Europe may be of particular interest. You can also upload LGBT-related images by participating in Wikimedia Commons' LGBT-related photo challenge. You are encouraged to share the results of your work here. Happy editing! --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:50, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikiproject Croatia At Wikimania 2014

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 16:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Question re: translation

G'day all, could someone translate this for me please? I'm told it is written with Croatian orthography. Za vrijeme ustanka bori se protiv crnogorskih separatista pod zastavom KPJ, a kasnije surađuje sa separatistima protiv NOP-a i KPJ. Ponovno, no ne zadugo, protiv separatista razvija bjesomučnu propagandu. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

"During the rebellion he was fighting against Montenegro separatists under the flag of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia, and later he cooperates with those separatists against the National Liberation Movement and the Communist Party. Again, but not for long, he develops a furious propaganda against the separatists." -sth like that Tzowu (talk) 14:03, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Cheers mate. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 14:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Are these articles about the same village?

Does anyone know if these two articles on English and Croatian Wikipedias about the same Croatian village? Jadrtovac and hr:Jadrtovac? The difference in co-ordinates is confusing. If they are the same, I will merge their items on Wikidata so that they are linked to each other in the side bar. Thanks. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 17:50, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

I used http://cgn.dgu.hr to verify that: a) there is just one Jadrtovac in Croatia, and b) the latitude in the English article was indeed off by 10 degrees. Fixed now. The two should be merged on Wikidata. Thanks for dropping a note! GregorB (talk) 18:31, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the quick response! I have merged the items, so all the links are together now. I also corrected the co-ordinates on Wikidata. Cheers! Del_♉sion23 (talk) 20:39, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Matthias Corvinus/archive1

I am not sure that the article properly summarizes his role in the Croatian history. Any comments, suggestions would be appreciated. Borsoka (talk) 13:29, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Languages in censuses and Race and ethnicity in censuses

Pleas add information about this country to this articles.--Kaiyr (talk) 07:39, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

"Metro"?

In settlement infoboxes, what does "metro" mean? Of course, "metropolitan area", but what does it correspond to in Croatia? For example, in Rijeka we learn that metro population is 213,666, while city population is 128,624. The first figure is unsourced. This conundrum potentially extends to all articles about Croatian cities (128 of them), although the metro figure is rarely listed. GregorB (talk) 19:32, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

I guess it means whatever a WP:RS explicitly describes it to be - i.e. if there's a RS somewhere saying "Rijeka metro area covers x/encompasses y population etc, there's no need for any other particular definition of the term. If there's no such a RS, the figure/concept of a "metro area" of the particular city fails WP:V and is therefore OR. I never found (did not look that hard though) any reliable sources regarding any sort of metro area of any city in Croatia except Zagreb though. In the case at hand (Rijeka), if the figure is unsourced, it should be removed until someone provides a source to the contrary.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:16, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree. Still, I suppose there should be a connection between whatever word we use to describe an area - "city", "urban" or "metro" (see e.g. Zagreb infobox for one more confounding example) and what census has to say about it.[12][13] So, in this case, I'd say city is 688,163, metro is 790,017, and we can't say anything about urban - it has to be less than 688,163 (e.g. Brezovica is arguably not an urban area), but anything beyond that is just guesswork. GregorB (talk) 20:52, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

RM which alerts bot won't pick up..

FWIW I just noted that Talk:Slobodan Milošević doesn't have a WP Croatia tag on it, so Alerts bot won't notify the current RM here at WP Croatia. But since this is a notable bio in relation to Croatia too, editors may wish to be aware of discussion. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:54, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Missing central committee articles

The League of Communists of Yugoslavia (LCY) is missing central committee articles akeen to the ones the Communist Party of China (18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China for instance) and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union for instance) have. LCY is currently missing 13 of 13;

• 1st Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 2nd Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 3rd Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 4th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 5th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 6th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 7th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 8th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 9th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 10th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 11th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 12th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
• 13th Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia

Does anyone have a URL link (or a book) which lists all the members? --TIAYN (talk) 10:59, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Expert attention

This is a notice about Category:Croatia articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock (talk) 19:54, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Railway lines in Croatia

Hi, due to some new official documents we need to update our List of railway lines in Croatia as well as some of our articles about individual railway lines in Croatia. I have made some proposals at the discussion page there. Greetings, Kleeblatt187 (talk) 21:43, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I haven't started yet with updating the list. Nevertheless I was thinking that updating the map (existing one here at commons) resp. creating a new (additional) map with the lines and numbers valid since early 2014 would be useful as well to illustrate the (new) list and similar articles about croatian railways. Does anyone know, if it would be legal to copy a map from hzinfra.hr, for example from the "Network statement 2015" (here in Croatian or here in English)? There are up-to-date-maps in annex 3.1 (within the pdf-file) and further pages. Unfortunately the map shown on hzinfra.hr has not been updated yet. It seems to me that the existing map at commons had also been taken from an official croatian document, so I assume it is legal according to croatian law. I couldn't find an up-to-date-map in Narodne novine, though. Thanks in advance and greetings! Kleeblatt187 (talk) 12:20, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Vandalism

User:Lackope vandalize articles about Croats example Emilio Ogñénovich, Agustín Vuletich, Marina Erakovic, Croatian Brazilian, Jackeline Petkovic also destroys articles about Montenegrins.--ChumleeS (talk) 11:07, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

• I left a message on Lackope's talk page and asked them to stop changing the language encoding without discussion. It is a sore political point, and if there is a sound linguistic reason for making the change, it should be discussed so that everyone is OK with it. I suspect it doesn't make much actual difference linguistically, so fighting about the politics of it wouldn't make much sense. Brianyoumans (talk) 17:07, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Automated Infobox settlement cleanup

I've developed an interest in user scripting lately, so I've made a custom script that automatically consolidates instances of {{Infobox settlement}}. The idea is to read the existing parameter values, supply some no-brainer defaults and auto-detected values, expand with the rest of the params (reasonable ones, at least), and produce something that is consistent and nicely formatted.

With the script, these become one-click edits:

• Metković[14]
• Vaška[15]

Also, the script automatically converts instances of {{Location map}} into Infobox settlement with one click, e.g.:

• Suhopolje[16]

Note the script is able to e.g. auto-detect and populate the county name and settlement type. I've been only working on it for a couple of days, so I suppose not everything is perfect, but it seems to be quite usable. I'm not really planning to do any mass editing with it for the time being, though.

Anyway, I'd like to hear your opinions and ideas... Is this something worth developing further? Are there similar tasks that could be automated? GregorB (talk) 18:14, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

In general this is a good idea, but I would never call the addition of 100 empty parameters a cleanup, more like a messup. The default templates from Starzynka added so many pointless bytes to the articles it's ridiculous. The mere workflow impact, where anyone wanting to edit the lead section needs to first scroll through five pages of fodder, is significant enough that this would warrant the work necessary to take it out. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:24, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

I think Joy has a good point there. Is there a way to skip empty parameters (except maybe a couple of predefined ones crucial to such boxes)? Otherwise, I think that might be a quite useful tool.--Tomobe03 (talk) 19:46, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) A valid point by Joy. On the other hand, though, it is very painful to enter or add more data to this particular template by hand, and it is particularly hard to do it in a consistent way (that is perhaps where the real messup bit appears). The script actually kills some params, and adds only those placeholders that could reasonably be used - even if that's a lot, really. (Is a more conservative selection of params in order, perhaps?) Apart from that, what about those 200 or so articles that only have the Location map? Assuming Infobox settlement is actually useful (and I'd argue that it is), adding it manually is a daunting task. Of course, if the script is doing too much, at least that shouldn't be hard to fix. GregorB (talk) 19:53, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

From the script's perspective, I suppose there are three classes of params:

1. "Always add them even if they don't originally appear" - either because they're no-brainers (such as time zone (perhaps?) or country/county), or are eminently useful (population data and such)
2. "Add them only if they originally appear and there is an actual value supplied"
3. "Kill them" - region is perhaps one example

Currently, maybe too many of them fall into #1. This is easy to fix, though. GregorB (talk) 20:15, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

If a newbie user screws up e.g. a parameter that comes as #5 out of 7 entries, it's usually fairly obvious and it gets fixed easily either by them reading the docs or by a more experienced user. Inviting newbies to fiddle with dozens of new parameters is comparatively worse IMO. I actually don't think I've ever seen a newbie fill out the bulk of the empty fields in an infobox settlement in a quality manner. From the asinine issues like using the infobox person "nationality" field for nacionalnost, to simply redundant things like that time zone parameter. The whole country is in the same time zone. If we need to do anything about the time zone parameter, it would be to convert the original template to allow automation - once you specify the country to be Croatia, the time zone gets shown automatically.

Definitely inline the 200 location maps into infobox settlements, but don't add any new empty fields. That conversion is useful enough on its own, because infobox parameters are by default more readable in comparison. Do feel free to always add the top-level comment saying "go to Template:Infobox settlement to see what else can be done with this template", because that part tends to be opaque (one can't just type "{{infobox settlement" into the search box and get to the right place; it would be great if that was fixed). --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:34, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the thing with time zone is that either it should be everywhere (which may or may not have sense) or it shouldn't be there at all (save for major cities perhaps), i.e. it should be either added or removed, and this is really bothersome to do by hand. That's why I see the script as doing cleanup in a general sense: it's not just about blindly adding stuff, it's about auto-removing stuff that wasn't supposed to be there in the first place.

A hypothetical "Infobox Croatian settlement" does not buy much IMO - there's only a handful of params (out of 150 or so) that could be customized.

Auto-converting location maps to basic Infobox settlement calls (just the original params + perhaps country and auto-detected county) may be a good start - at any rate, this does not require parsing, so it's an order of magnitude simpler to do. A slight problem: one cannot have {{Infobox settlement}} and {{coord}} in the same article. Note also that coord has the same info as location map, so it would be possible to auto-convert these too into infoboxes (well, possible, not necessarily desirable). GregorB (talk) 10:43, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Fully agree on the general cleanup issue. Forking the whole thing never crossed my mind - the time zone issue should be a matter of a single if statement in the template. Regarding coordinates, it actually can be done with the right set of parameters, I've run into countless instances where the coordinates in coord and those in location map / infobox settlement differ. Sometimes the difference is trivial, but sometimes it's off significantly. Any script that helps point these things out and possibly also helps further to reconcile them (e.g. by checking some basic sanity) is a Good Thing(TM). --Joy [shallot] (talk) 13:03, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay, how about limiting ourselves to conversion from Location map to Infobox settlement, e.g. like this: [17] Settlement type and county are auto-populated. GregorB (talk) 19:24, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Definitely! How do we use this, again? Does the default user script procedure work?

FixCroIS (source) – Fix Croatian Infobox settlements

--Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:40, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, pasting the above into common.js is all that it takes. The script will appear as an extra link in the Tools section (only in edit mode!). But first I'd like to fork that bit out of the current code - FixCroIS.js currently does all kinds of unrelated and rather involved stuff including parsing, while the above edit is a simple regex replace with a bit of extra logic. I'll split the code into a new script shortly and get back to you. GregorB (talk) 20:19, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay, it's:

ConvertLocationMap (source)

I've left some remarks at the talk page, so the discussion about the script is best continued there. GregorB (talk) 21:55, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Autonomous Regional Party

Hello, this page was recently nominated for deletion, although the prod was removed, the notability tag remains. I'm finding it hard to verify its notability, and I'd appreciate if anyone who knows about Croatian politics/can access sources is able to help. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 08:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

I added the notability tag yesterday because I didn't really see a case for notability (1 seat in the Primorje-Gorski Kotar County assembly), and there seems to be no secondary coverage beyond routine news items. I did not study the sources in detail, so I could be wrong about this. GregorB (talk) 09:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, GregorB. Boleyn (talk) 09:34, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović

Since the 2015 elections are coming up, I think it is a good idea to work on Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović's page. It was woefully scant before I worked on it and can still use some more attention. --Jesuislafete (talk) 05:52, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Given the outcome of the election, the article is bound to get more attention in the future, but for the time being it would be a good idea to keep a closer eye on it, because it has already begun to attract bad edits (WP:CRYSTAL seems to be the problem) and minor vandalism. GregorB (talk) 15:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

The same happened to the President of Croatia - I just reverted seven WP:CRYSTAL edits, and updated the rest of the article while I was at it, but I have no doubt that (assuming well-intended) crystallballing will continue.--Tomobe03 (talk) 16:05, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

BTW, if any one of you two (or someone else) took up editing Grabar-Kitarović article to GAN standards with a view of DYK nom scheduled for 19 February (as new GA), I think there'd be someone to take up the review fairly quickly. If you know what I mean (and it is not to say that GA criteria need not be fulfilled).--Tomobe03 (talk) 16:23, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Hear, hear. That's a very interesting idea, but - speaking of the GA criteria - what about WP:WIAGA #5? The wording seems to imply that the article does not need not be stable in an absolute sense, just free from edit warring/content disputes. Still, I seem to recall that articles about current events have been failed for being in flux. GregorB (talk) 16:44, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

WIAGA#5 says explicitly that the article must "not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute" - changes due to article improvements are not only acceptable but quite welcome. No other criteria apply to this respect.--Tomobe03 (talk) 17:25, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay then, I trust that whoever does the GAR will see the things that way too. :-) There is a snag though: the article seems to be slated for WP:ITN, and that would disqualify it from DYK. GA is still a worthy goal, nevertheless. GregorB (talk) 18:11, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Bolded WP:ITN entry certainly trumps DYK (non-bolded appearances do not preclude DYK noms), but GA would certainly be a worthy effort regardless if the article ends up in the ITN or the DYK section.--Tomobe03 (talk) 18:25, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Nacional

As you may have noticed, the Nacional weekly has been relaunched. Ironically, all links to nacional.hr website are now dead. Thanks to Tomobe, who archived them, this shouldn't be a problem, and the website seems to be under construction at the moment, so the links might go live again. Anyway, just a heads up. GregorB (talk) 21:50, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Some of the articles have been archived using www.webcitation.org, and in such cases the archive url is already included in the cite template. Otherwise the articles have been archived using the Wayback Machine and may be looked up there using the old url. At any rate, any articles now unavailable elsewhere should be tagged by "deadurl=yes" and "archiveurl=" parameters in the cite templates. Old urls should be preserved even if they are dead. Cheers.--Tomobe03 (talk) 15:34, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

The Nacional URLs are live again. Www.nacional.hr in these URLs is now simply redirected to arhiva.nacional.hr, so everything seems to be fine and no action is needed. GregorB (talk) 16:49, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

That's good news. Nonetheless, I routinely archive all online references found in articles I contribute to (at least B-class or better ones) using the Wayback machine.--Tomobe03 (talk) 14:14, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

A good idea, especially for high-value sources. Personally, I regret not having archived some of them. GregorB (talk) 19:44, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Presidents of Croatia

Hi all. There is a discussion at Talk:List of Presidents of Croatia and Talk:Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović that may be of interest to members of this project. Cheers. Timbouctou (talk) 14:31, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Kajkavian dialect

The Kajkavian dialect article needs expert help from someone who knows the dialect and can correct the English translations in the table with the section heading Kajkavian dialect#Kajkavian phonetics.--DThomsen8 (talk) 21:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Please rate this article as it should be

Armenia–Croatia relations. I wrote this article. I guess it's start-class, though I need an expert on this. --Yerevani Axjik (talk) 23:15, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

It's way better than Start-class. You might consider nominating it at WP:DYK and WP:GA. Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:58, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank your for your review. I have nominated the article at WP:GA. What do I need to do to nominate it for WP:DYK, do I formulate the question or administrators do it themselves? --Yerevani Axjik (talk) 13:10, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

No. Please look up and follow instructions available at T:TDYK.--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:02, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Article Minority language

I know most of editors here are tired of debate over minority languages but you might be interested to share your oppinions on requested comments I made last month on article Minority language as I was advised by more experienced editor from this project. I think that your involvement can help to overcome the fictitious conflict made by an editor on this project (IvanOS) that insists on eliminating co-official minority names (covered by sources) from articles by the claim that this project has a consensus to eliminate them from articles (And I do not talk here about specific case of Vukovar). I do not know anything about such a consensus and I think that he present his biased opinion as project position and by that even undermines reputation of our project. You can take part in conversation here: Talk:Minority language#Minority languages ​​in geographical articles.--MirkoS18 (talk) 13:02, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Ladislaus I of Hungary: peer review

All comments and suggestions are welcome here. Thank you for your time in advance. Borsoka (talk) 03:49, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Dusty articles

If you happen to like visiting Dusty articles, the WP Croatia equivalent can be found here. Not having been edited since 2012, many of these could use a tweak. GregorB (talk) 09:06, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/32 Bita

Could we have a hand with reliable Croatian sources at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/32 Bita? – czar 21:16, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Art Pavilion in Zagreb listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Art Pavilion in Zagreb to be moved to Art Pavilion, Zagreb. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:49, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Nikola Tesla

BAn RFC: Should all discussions and proposals about Nikola Tesla's nationality, ethnicity and country of birth (broadly construed) be limited to the sub-page: Talk:Nikola Tesla/Nationality and ethnicity? has been posted here. Interested editors are invited to comment.- MrX 20:54, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Croatia is a precedent

Settlements in Croatia receive the categories (Category:Serb communities in Croatia]) that have no other settlements on Wikipedia. For example Subotica 54,000 Hungarians no minority category, Ada with 200 inhabitants, has three minority categories! (Category:Serbian-speaking territorial units in Croatia 115 articles, Slovak-speaking territorial two articles, and Croatian-speaking countries and territories 6 articles).Under the guise of protection of minority rights is carried out a dangerous plan. Examples are more like templates and Cyrillic. --FDrago77 (talk) 10:00, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Let me just say that whoever wants to comment on this issue is invited to do so at Category talk:Serb communities in Croatia. GregorB (talk) 13:07, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

The problem is that, what in the discussions participates small number of contributors, and three or four contributors do whatever they want. Soon we will have this category Насељена мјеста у Републици Српској Крајини (1991—1995)--FDrago77 (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Miroslav Filipović#Request for comment

Interested editors might like to consider commenting on whether the lead of this article should mention that Filipović was a military chaplain and Catholic friar who was expelled from the Franciscan order before the end of the war but was not excommunicated by the Catholic Church. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 10:41, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Thousands of Croatian cityscape and other images may be deleted from Commons

Please see discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Two_weeks_to_save_freedom_of_panorama_in_Europe. I think it is an item of major interest to the editors interested in this WikiProject. The (very underestimated) counts for how many images may be affected have been posted to commons:Commons_talk:Freedom_of_Panorama_2015#numbers. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

HNK Hajduk Split

A 9 year-old fantasist has been vandalising the team's article. Could somebody who's able to check source material keep an eye on his newer edits which seem to reasonable. Thanks, Bazj (talk) 13:13, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Croatian Wikipedia Improvement

I appreciate the effort to improve articles on Croatia. But is there any effort to improve Croatian language wikipedia? To quote Wikipedia itself:

In late 2013, Croatian Wikipedia received attention from international media for promoting facist, right-wing worldview as well as bias against Serbs of Croatia and anti-LGBT propaganda by the means of historical revisionism and by negating or diluting the severity of crimes committed by the Ustaše regime (see Croatian Wikipedia).

My experience is that it is still the same, and I noticed that some of administrators and bureaucrats are from Metapedia. It reads very much as Metapedia any way.Anamink (talk) 20:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I've made a number of public comments on this topic, so I'll confine myself to the following:

• CW is abysmal, in more ways than one.
• As much as I've thought about it - and I've given it a lot of thought - I see no way to remedy the situation.

I'd be happy to be proven wrong on the above, but chances are slim... GregorB (talk) 20:31, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

This ([18], [19]) is most certainly not an improvement of Croatian Wikipedia, starting from grammar to WP:MOS. No wonder you got banned, which is still not a reason to spam every possible article with how "fascist" Croatian Wikipedia is. Tzowu (talk) 09:46, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

A valid point, but e.g. I got blocked there for two weeks for this edit, which is a bit harder to explain... GregorB (talk) 11:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Is it moral not to be blocked at such wikipedias?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:14, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Gregor, I guess some of the administrators there are still angry at you for your involvement in the 2013 discussions, so they are using every oportunity to ban you. Tzowu (talk) 12:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm aware of that, but even if they had a legitimate reason to be angry (and they don't), using arbitrary blocks as a way to "get even" with somebody is blatant abuse. And, of course, I'm far from being the only one on the receiving end. All that apparently confirms rather than rebuts what I and others had to say in 2013. GregorB (talk) 13:25, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@Tzowu I would have no objections if I was banned for bad grammar and formatting. I also appreciate any advice on how to improve it. I think the issue tho was the content, not the form. I was banned by Kubura for saying that Croatian is a literary standard of Serbo-croatian. You may disagree with that although that is the view of vast majority of linguists world wide (though not in Croatia). But it is not a reason for banning me. But that is not a problem. Problem is content of Croatian Wikipedia. Articles on Bosnia and Bosniaks for instance espouse views of Ustashe (Croatian terrorist and ultranationalist group), articles on Ustashe is either copied from Metapedia or written by the same person. I think your issue is content not the form of my edits as well, judging from how you wanted to undo my edit on Croatia. Yes, I know, it was poorly formatted. Shame you did not improve the edit. So sorry to disagree with you but if I find same articles on CW as they are on Metapedia (Anti-semitic, white nationalist, neo-Nazi encyclopedia) that is a reasonable cause to ask for someone to do something about it. People who think this is not a problem can always contribute to Metapedia, if they wish to do so.Anamink (talk) 15:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

That article on Croatian Wikipedia about Serbo-Croatian is written based on what the majority of Croatian sources say. In Croatia there is officially no Serbo-Croatian and Serbian and Croatian are not regarded as same languages. In English sources Serbian and Croatian are mostly viewed as the same language (Serbo-Croatian, Croatian-Serbian, BCS...) and that's why the article on English Wikipedia is different. On the article about the Ustaše it says that they were a fascist, radical nationalist organization that ethnically cleansed and killed Jews, Roma, Serbs and Croat dissidents. Yes, it was different in 2013 and it was biased, but today the article looks much better. On Metapedia it says that they stopped political repression and terror against Croats. I believe you can see the difference.

The reason why I reverted that edit on the article about Croatia is that i don't think it belongs there. Not every issue in our country should be mentioned on the most popular Croatian article, or else we'll end up adding every incident like the Swastika on Poljud which actually gained much more attention in foreign media than the Croatian Wikipedia controversy. Tzowu (talk) 15:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I think your logic is dangerous because it is basically saying that something is true because most people agree it is. So when majority believed the Earth is flat, it was flat. Never mind the small detail of science getting in the way. Of course Serbian and Croatian are not the same language. They are two literary standards of the same language. I can't see much improvement since 2013. The most controversial bits were edited, I give you that. But just have a look at this propaganda:https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pokolj_kod_Drvara_27._srpnja_1941. Now it looks more like Metapedia for kids, which makes it even worse.Anamink (talk) 16:15, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

There are many issues that two or more countries/nations disagree on. That is most evident on articles about wars, I doubt that Ukrainian and Russian Wikipedia share the same viewpoint on the war in Eastern Ukraine. Disagreements on the wars of the 90's in former Yugoslavia are also well known. As for the Serbo-Croatian article, we can't write that because a vast majority of Croatian linguists disagree with it. What we can or should do is make it more neutral, without personal opinions on what, for example, foreign linguists say and why they mostly use the term Serbo-Croatian.

I don't know much about what happened in Drvar and it does look exaggerated, but even Marko Orešković wrote about crimes in Glamoč, Kulen Vakuf, Boričevac and Čorci in 1941. Tzowu (talk) 16:42, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

At risk of straying away from the real issue I agree with you that there should be a balanced view presented on the issue of Serbo-croatian language. I also accept that my edit on CW could be done in a more balanced manner. But it still remains the case that the article is not balanced. Considering that 99% of linguists world wide disagree with the opinions expressed on CW on this language at least they could mention this views in a non biased manner. If CW bureaucrats and some Croatian linguists manage to convince themselves that people in one Bosnian catholic village speak a different language from the neighbouring muslim village and that both of these villages speak different languages from a near orthodox village all I can say is good for them. They can learn these three languages and work as translators...Bosnian and Serbian Wikipedia editors will be keen to join them. But they are other articles that should be less contentious and could do with an improvement. I randomly looked up Slavoljub Penkala today. He was a great man but hardly one of the greatest inventors, as CW wants you to believe, and no, he did not invent ebonite, since it was invented in 1839, 32 years before ha was born. Of course they declare him a Croat, as they do with Nikola Tesla, Marco Polo, Petar Preradović, Josip Runjanin, and pretty much anyone who achieved anything worth mentioning and ever set foot in Croatia.Anamink (talk) 19:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

You are talking nonsenses: hrvatski znanstvenik means scientist from croatia, not his nationality. Runjanin is croatian composer, but that doesn't mean that he is Croat, and nobody claims that he is a Croat. Read carefully and grow up!--93.143.97.233 (talk) 05:38, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Also, read carefully the source in article about Runjanin [20].--93.143.97.233 (talk) 05:41, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Duim Frankopan

Hello, I would like to ask for your help. I intend to create and write articles about all of the 14th century oligarchs who dominated the Kingdom of Hungary (and Croatia) during the Interregnum between 1301 and 1310. One of them was Duim Frankopan (sorry I don't know his native Croatian name) according to the Hungarian historiography (see this map, however I have no information about him as he never held any dignity/political position. So I ask for help from someone who is expert in Croatian history (maybe Tzowu, Joy, Antidiskriminator?); could you provide titles of some English-language or at least Croatian works where I can get information on Duim Frankopan? Thanks in advance, --Norden1990 (talk) 20:23, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

His name in Croatian is Dujam II Frankopan. I found some info about him in Croatian language in Vjekoslav Klaić - Povijest Hrvata (1st and 2nd book, about his role in the succession crisis and his relations with Paul Šubić) and in Hrvatski biografski leksikon [21]. His father was Fridrik II. Frankopan. His year and place of birth and place of death are unknown, he died in 1317. Tzowu (talk) 20:44, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Stefan Babonić is Stjepan IV. Babonić, he has a stub article in Croatian Wikipedia [22]. Tzowu (talk) 20:58, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. :) I think it will be a good start for me. I've found an image, is this Dujam II? I assume Dujam is a native Croatian name and there is no English translation of his name, am I right? The case of Stephen Babonic is more commplicated, I have source which says there were two family members in same time who bore the name and both served as Ban of Slavonia. Wonderful! --Norden1990 (talk) 21:21, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

p.s.: Babonic has also a stub article in hu-wiki: [23], with full of false information. --Norden1990 (talk) 21:26, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

That's Dujam's monument in Otočac, but I don't know did he really look like that :D. I also don't know what would be the english translation of Dujam. As for the Babonići, there was Stjepan III who served from 1288-1295 as Ban of Slavonia, and Stjepan IV (his brother) in 1299 and from 1310-1316. Tzowu (talk) 21:45, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

According to my source (Pál Engel) they were cousins and Stephen IV was the "oligarch", Stephen III perhapds died before 1301 (end of the Árpáds). I write their family tree based on Engel's work right now. The name version of Dujam II Frankopan is OK for me. Anyway, I observed several years earlier that in Croatian works, the Ban of Slavonia and Ban of Croatia dignity lists are totally differents from the lists which provided by Hungarian historiographical works. For instance, according to Zsoldos, the "Ban of Croatia" only established in 1275, before that it was only Ban of Slavonia, who "ruled" whole Slavonia, Croatia and Dalmatia but under the title Ban of Slavonia. --Norden1990 (talk) 22:13, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, he was his cousin. Stjepan IV's brothers were Ivan, Radoslav II and Oto. Where did you find Babonić's family tree?

Are you reffering to Attila Zsoldos? I have some work of his translated to Croatian (Hrvatska i Slavonija U kraljevstvu Arpadovića, Croatia and Slavonia in the Arpad Kingdom). There he talks about the title "Whole of Slavonia", for 1275 he says that the banship of Croatia and Slavonia was divided in that year. Is that list the same as the one on Hungarian Wikipedia? [24] Tzowu (talk) 22:32, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Attila Zsoldos' archontology. I also own digital CD version of Engel's genealogy which never published in print. It contains the family trees of Hungarian and Croatian genera (incl. Frangepan, Subics, Babonic, Raholcai-Újlaki/Ilocki etc.). --Norden1990 (talk) 22:44, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

The most notable other Dujam in Croatia is apparently referred in English as Saint Domnius, but he was actually pre-Slavonic. This is a rather niche name and a Google Books search for "Domnius Babonić" gave me absolutely nothing. It's probably best to keep it verbatim for the time being. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 10:49, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

And Domnius Frankopan? :) But it's a Latin name, so I think Dujam would be appropriate. --Norden1990 (talk) 14:52, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

That list is much more adequate than English version here, but it should be noted László Markó (which is used as a reference) used mostly 19th century sources. The Zsoldos archontology filled a very huge vacuum when published in 2011. --Norden1990 (talk) 22:49, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

I created the Babonići family tree. --Norden1990 (talk) 23:35, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

The problem with early bans is that their position in the administration has not been fully formed and their activities precisely specified. Also, there was the position of a duke so the two overlapped. However, the real power was in the hands of the local nobles. Tzowu (talk) 23:57, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

There is even more confusion; some non-royal office-holders were also referred as "Dukes", for example Denis Türje: banus et dux totius Sclavonie. In the future, I will fix the articles Ban of Croatia and Ban of Slavonia (at least until end of the middle ages), similarly to Judge royal and Voivode of Transylvania. --Norden1990 (talk) 00:12, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride!

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!

• What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
• When? June 2015
• How can you help?

  1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here

  2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)

  3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

Liberland

Please see the RfC on Talk:Liberland. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 17:30, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Milko Šparemblek

Dear Croatia experts: Here's an old draft that will soon be deleted because the creator didn't add any sources. There appear to be some, but they are not in English and I can't tell if they are reliable and discuss Milko Šparemblek extensively. Is this a notable person?—Anne Delong (talk) 13:26, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Regarding his notability, he received the Vladimir Nazor Lifetime Achievement Award, so I'd argue he meets WP:ANYBIO #1. GregorB (talk) 07:24, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Croatian language sources

I was wondering if someone could help out with the article for Stefano Nonveiller. The article is up for AfD and there's a question whether or not this person actually existed. Another article, Stefano de Nonveiller, was deleted at AfD recently for the same concerns. Usually there will be some sort of coverage in English to back up basic claims, but I know that this can sometimes not happen with people who would be likely to only receive coverage in a specific language - especially if the language isn't considered "mainstream" like French or German. Can one of you guys check? I'd feel better knowing that there was a check for Croatian sources. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:24, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Croatia article and the Croatian Wikipedia

There is a discussion taking place here about whether the Croatia article should include material about a controversy regarding the Croatian Wikipedia. Contributions are welcome. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:26, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

New politician articles

Just a heads-up, you might want to be on the lookout for POV in articles about politics as the elections near. I've spotted a new politician article that reads like a CV, but I don't have time these days to deal with it. Daß Wölf (talk) 01:21, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Franjo Tuđman lead section

Can someone share his opinion regarding the lead section of the Franjo Tuđman article? There is a discussion on Talk:Franjo Tuđman about the ICTY case against 6 Bosnian Croat leaders in the lead. Tzowu (talk) 16:36, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Yugoslav Wars

There is also a discussion on Talk:Yugoslav Wars#Recent changes, regarding the addition of sources from unreliable pages like emperors-clothes.com and globalresearch.ca to the Croatian War of Independence section. Tzowu (talk) 19:10, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Picki u dusa listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Picki u dusa. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Place Clichy (talk) 10:58, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

A user had the idea to redirect this page to Greeks and this page to Greece. I don't speak Croatian (I'm not even sure it is Croatian) but my senses tell me that it is offensive. The first one was deleted, but the second was denied speedy deletion because administrators were not sure if this is an attack or not. If someone can please confirm whether this redirect should be deleted or should stay, please express it at the redirect discussion. Place Clichy (talk) 10:58, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm guessing this is Macedonian; I've replied on the RfD page. Daß Wölf (talk) 15:36, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors

There is a new cleanup category: Category:Pages with reference errors. Also, there is a list of WP Croatia articles with reference errors, so you might want to check and fix some... GregorB (talk) 12:18, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Croatian names RM

Talk:Marin Čilić → Marin Cilic and (2) another related Polish RM see also Talk:Agnieszka Radwańska and (3) current RM at Talk:Ana Ivanovic for background In ictu oculi (talk) 10:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

• Note - an editor requested that all of these three been considered together and closed together, a further issue of of MOS:IDENTITY has been raised about one of the RMs. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:30, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Duplicate article for Humac

The new stub for Humac (Jelsa) is a duplicate for an existing article on Humac (Hvar). The village is within the Opcina of Jelsa, on the island of Hvar. I think for the sake of clarity the name should give the island, though somebody obviously didn't make the connection. Should Humac (Jelsa) simply be marked for deletion, or redirected? Farscot (talk) 19:26, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Croatia 2015

There is a new edition of the Yearbook, and a new template to cite it: {{Croatia Yearbook 2015}}, which obsoletes {{Croatia Yearbook 2013}}. GregorB (talk) 20:25, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Veljko Bulajić film

High Voltage (1981 film), a Croatian film by Veljko Bulajić, is up for deletion here. Since the film is foreign-language and precedes the Internet, coverage may be buried in print sources. Can anyone familiar with Croatian publications find any coverage to see if the article warrants keeping or not? Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 16:22, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. To me, it is obvious that the film in question is notable according to both formal (WP:NFILM) and informal criteria (Bulajić is a major director, so all of his featured films may be presumed notable) - but it is a shame all these articles aren't better developed, because they are in constant peril of being deleted for one reason or the other... GregorB (talk) 19:24, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Peer review: Coloman the Learned

All comments would be highly appreciated here: Wikipedia:Peer review/Coloman, King of Hungary/archive1. Thank you for your time. Borsoka (talk) 06:33, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Ladislaus I of Hungary (FAC)

Comments would be highly appreciated here. Thank you for your time. Borsoka (talk) 14:12, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Church of Holy Salvation - incorrect translation (in title and in the article)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Holy_Salvation,_Cetina "Spas" means "Saviour", both in Church Slavonic and medieval/contemporary Croatian. Contemporary Croatian word "Spas", in ecclesiastical context*, comes from the Church Slavonic tradition of Croatia. As in other Church slavonic traditions (Russian, Serbian, etc.) throughout the medieval period "Spas" was often used instead of "Jesus", whom Christians call "Saviour". In eccl. context, the word used for "salvation" is "spasenje" (in secular context "spas" really means "salvation"). The name "Church of the Holy Saviour" (Croatian "Crkva Svetog Spasa") is quite common in Croatia. Someone should replace every "Salvation" with "Saviour", both in the title and it the article. I didn't want to change the content without changing the article title, since I don't know how to do it.

Request for comments

There is a request for comments that is likely of interest to this project at Talk:Rajka_Baković#Request for comments. --- Otr500 (talk) 16:00, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Notice to participants at this page about adminship

Many participants here create a lot of content, have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:43, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Seeking access to Jutarnji articles

This is a second request, connected to the one directly above. Four of the sources that I'm looking for were all written by an author named Jurica Pavičić, for a publication called Jutarnji list. While I've had more luck finding the website for this publication, it seems that the Way Back Machine never archived any of the website's articles from the month of the festival. I've done a little more looking around, and a Google search for the name of the author combined with "animafest 2006" yields a few promising results. Three potentially useful articles appear: Animafest: Godina Francuza (published June 15, 2006), Animafest: Pobjednica Joanne Quinn, Levijatan osvojio nagradu Zlatni Zagreb (published June 17, 2006), and Pobjednica Animafesta Joanna Quinn stara je poznanica Zagreba (published June 18, 2006). I don't know whether any of these are the ones specifically mentioned on the page that I linked to in my first request, but it appears that they were all written by Pavičić, and regardless, they're clearly about the 2006 Animafest. Unfortunately, when I click on the weblinks, they all take me to pages saying (in Croation - I used Google Translate) "The Page You Requested Does Not Exist". Does anyone here know if there's a way to access these? Thanks. --Jpcase (talk) 23:25, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Jpcase, no luck here either - nothing on the Wayback Machine, and I couldn't find them elsewhere, so I suppose these are not available online. GregorB (talk) 17:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Seeking information on Croatian source, Novi tjednik

I'm currently working on an article in my sandbox about an animated short film called Le Building. While the film itself is French, it screened in the 2006 Croatian film festival Animafest Zagreb. I had to trawl through the Way Back Machine in order to find any information on this, but in the process, I came across this page, listing various news items that had been written about the festival that year. I'm curious now, whether I can find the full text of these sources. The first two come from Filmski.net - I was able to find these on the Way Back Machine. The third source comes from a publication called Novi tjednik. Upon Googling this term, it wasn't obvious to me whether this publication has a website or not. Is anyone familiar with it? I imagine that the actual articles are no longer online, but if they were ever archived, I can probably manage finding them. I just need to know where to look. --Jpcase (talk) 20:31, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Jpcase, there is http://novi-tjednik.hr/, which redirects to http://sibenskiportal.rtl.hr/, but I'm not sure if that's the publication in question - at any rate, I'm not at all familiar with it. I do remember that there was another weekly called just Tjednik (http://tjednik.hr), which is now defunct. Their pages are archived by the Wayback Machine, and I thought maybe animafest.hr got it mixed up, but I couldn't find anything about this article, so I'm not sure. This source is going to be very difficult to find at best. GregorB (talk) 16:57, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

@GregorB: Thanks for looking around! I may look into these links later, when I have a little more time, but perhaps it's best to just call these a dead end. I appreciate the help! --Jpcase (talk) 17:36, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Request for help with a photograph at Jastrebarsko Cemetery

G'day everyone, I'm trying to improve the Jastrebarsko concentration camp article, and would like to add a freely-licensed photograph of the "Mother and Child" monument in the Jastrebarsko cemetery. If anyone is heading out in that direction, it would be greatly appreciated if you could take a photograph of it and upload it to Commons. The monument I'm referring to is shown here. Jastrebarsko is about 37 klicks southwest of Zagreb, there's a Jastrebarsko exit off the A1, and the cemetery is apparently at Anthony Mihanovića 14, 10450. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:33, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Request for translation help

Pozdrav,

I was wondering if any of our resident native/advanced Croatian speakers could help out with this translation of the hr.wiki article on Nikola Nalješković? I've done the best I can, but there are some sentences in the original article with words or grammatical structures which look out of place to me, either because my intermediate, conversational (rather than literary) Croatian has grown very rusty or because the original article didn't make much sense anyway; probably the former. The parts I omitted or am unsure about are indicated with ellipses/question marks. Hvala unaprijed! Commissaress (talk) 13:31, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Commissaress. I hope that you find someone to help with the translation. Can I just remind you of the need to source material on Wikipedia, per WP:VERIFY? This applies to translations as much as freshly written articles. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Cordless Larry, yeah, I need help with that too actually :/ I can't find any English language information on the subject of the article. There's a fair bit of public domain academic writing relating to him, but it's all in Croatian. I forgot to add an unreferenced template though; thanks for the reminder. Commissaress (talk) 15:36, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

You beat me to it - thanks! Commissaress (talk) 15:38, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Leksikon radija i televizije

Just today I discovered the 762-page Leksikon radija i televizije,(in Croatian) freely available as a PDF book. For anyone who is writing about Croatian radio and television, this is a goldmine. I've always found that, unlike Croatian film, the coverage of radio and television has typically been ephemeral, making it difficult to write substantial articles on these topics - hopefully that should be less of a problem now... GregorB (talk) 20:16, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

RfC notice: The naming convention for free royal cities in the Kingdom of Hungary

There is an active RfC about the naming convention for free royal cities in the Kingdom of Hungary. Ditinili (talk) 18:58, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Cannabis in Croatia needs improvement

We have a new article Cannabis in Croatia, but it could really use improvement and expansion, especially from anyone who can read Croatian sources. With a little polishing, it'd also be really useful to make a translated version for Croatian Wikipedia since it's a topic of increasing interesting these days. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:01, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages

Greetings WikiProject Croatia/Archive 4 Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

• Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 17:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Terrorism in Yugoslavia

Just a heads up, politics is not something I'm interested in or knowledgeable at, but it might be a good idea to check out this new article and these edits which are sourced predominantly by Serbian sources. Daß Wölf 01:24, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Wiki (eng) stranica o Ruđeru Boškoviću

Engleska verzija stranice o Josipu Ruđeru Boškoviću je pod stalnim pritiskom određenih korisnika iz Srbije. Premda ne postoje nikakve reference (dakle, znanstveni radovi publicirani u međunarodnim časopisima) koje bi ozbiljno podržale tezu da je Bošković bio srpski znanstvenik, stalno se inzistira da se ne postavlja nacionalnost Ruđera Boškovića, da se naglasi da postoji svojatanje Boškovića od strane Hrvata, Talijana i Srba, te da se njegovo ime piše i ćirilicom. Problemi su sljedeći:

1. Premda stvarno postoje svojatanja i od Talijana i od Srba, ona su nesimetrična. Većina relevantnih međunarodnih izvora tvrdi da je Bošković bio hrvatski isusovac. Manji dio tvrdi da je riječ o talijanu. Niti jedan bitni izvor, međunarodni, ne tvrdi da je riječ o Srbinu (neki tvrde da je nejasno koje je nacionalnosti zbog povijesnih okolnosti). Stoga je lažno prezentirati tvrdnje da je bio Hrvat, Talijan i Srbin, kao simetrične. Pogledati raspravu o referencama na talku od dotičnog članka.

2. Ruđer Bošković se nikada nije potpisivao ćirilicom, stoga ne vidim smisao da se insistira na ćiriličnoj verziji njegovog imena.

3. Ruđer Bošković je već na potpisu hrvatskih znanstvenika na wikipediji i ne vidim u čemu je problem da u članku eksplicitno piše da je Hrvat.

Međutim, svaki put kada ispravim ove podatke, netko iz Srbije mi vrati na prethodno stanje. Što mogu napraviti po ovom pitanju, tj. kako djelovati? Očito se ne gledaju previše reference iz međunarodnih časopisa.

Pozz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Everett57 (talk • contribs) 21:56, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Everett57, I'd say some of the recent changes are fine (Bošković as a Croatian scientist, as well as removing the Cyrillic name), and your supporting arguments seem quite valid. Some of the changes I'd disagree with, such as removing the SANU claim (one may disagree with it, but it's there and is not trivial, therefore it cannot be ignored).

What can be done about it? My advice for the time being is this: please be patient and don't go into edit wars if your edits should happen to be reverted. Time permitting, I'll make a comment on the issues in the article's talk page. Maybe a request for comments is in order, but we'll see how it goes. GregorB (talk) 21:08, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

GregorB, I thought about your words about removing the SANU, and I realized that you are right. I updated that section with small addition. Thank you for you suggestions! --Everett57 (talk) 22:55, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Everett57I just noticed this. Everett57, unfortunately, I'm also familiar with those editors. FkpCascais , 23 editor and Zoupan often work in group and it's hard to go against 3 of them alone. I often see them inserting such claims in various articles. I also see them often accusing other editors that they are the "Asdisis" guy. My history with them goes from Serbs of Croatia, Yugoslavia and Novak Djokovic's article. My encounter with them always goes to RfC, and if you go to the mentioned articles, you'll see walls of text and time and time wasted battling them and their behavior. Luckily, although I edit as an ip, which makes me a great target for personal attacks, I managed to win those RfC's. You were lucky you had GregorB and that other editor to help, otherwise this would also go like their previous discussions. It's impossible to discuss with them, because they are here to push their opinion. On Novak Djokovic FkpCascais had even directly lied in his effort to disprove Djokovic's own claim that his mother is a Croat. On Tesla page he was disproving Tesla's own statement that he was born in Croatia. Always a good decision is to call other editors to join the discussion. When I deal with them, I usually open a RfC and sometimes I call other editors with already have experience with them to join in. 141.136.213.50 (talk) 23:37, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Faraun

Anybody here have any idea what Faraun is? It was about to be deleted through WP:PROD, but I thought I'd give it a second chance at existence.--Prisencolin (talk) 02:05, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Upcoming "420 collaboration"

You are invited to participate in the upcoming "420 collaboration", which is being held from Saturday, April 15 to Sunday, April 30, and especially on April 20, 2017! The purpose of the collaboration, which is being organized by WikiProject Cannabis, is to create and improve cannabis-related content at Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects in a variety of fields, including: culture, health, hemp, history, medicine, politics, and religion. WikiProject Croatia participants may be particularly interested in the following: Cannabis in Croatia. For more information about this campaign, and to learn how you can help improve Wikipedia, please visit the "420 collaboration" page.

---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:45, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Free Territory of Trieste

Hi guys, over the past few weeks the article Free Territory of Trieste has been edited to contend that it was never dissolved, and still exists as a sovereign state. This seems to me to be manifestly wrong and a fringe theory (see for example this website), and I don't think the cited sources support this contention at all. Similar content seems to have been previously inserted into the article years ago and subsequently removed, as documented on the article's talk page. I have no expertise on the matter, so thought I would alert potentially interested parties. Portwalrus (talk) 15:57, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:History of Istria#NPOV problems

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:History of Istria#NPOV problems. 72.201.104.140 (talk) 00:05, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Croatia/Archive 4/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Croatia.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

• The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
• The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
• The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Croatia, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Ante Jelić

Hi, I wonder if a member of this project can help evaluate notability of this subject? K.e.coffman (talk) 05:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Looking at both the article in question and its Croatian-language counterpart, I don't see the case for notability w.r.t. WP:GNG or otherwise. If it were nominated for deletion, I'd say "delete". GregorB (talk) 16:01, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Etymology of "Issa"

I've added the theory that "Issa" meant "baths" on Illyrian on that article. What do you think about that theory? Do you know any other theory to explain the name "Issa"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vis_(town)#History I think that etymology of Croatian place names in general is too poorly covered on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.201.185.213 (talk) 15:33, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

I tend to agree, etymology is typically ignored, and when there's something, it's usually unsourced. Speaking of which, here's a good source on the topic:

Šimunović, Petar (March 2013). "Predantički toponimi u današnjoj (i povijesnoj) Hrvatskoj" (PDF). Folia onomastica Croatica (in Croatian) (22). Zagreb: Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts: 147–214. Retrieved 18 January 2016. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (|trans-title= suggested) (help)

Regarding the above interpretation (Issa = baths), I'm a bit skeptical; I'll comment further in the article's talk. GregorB (talk) 22:32, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Sunday (Nedjelja)

The 1969 Croatian film Sunday (or Nedjelja) has been nominated for deletion. Can editors here review Croatian-language sources and share their feedback at the AfD? The AfD can be found here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sunday (1969 film). Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 13:32, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:Homeland's Gratitude Medal recipients has been nominated for discussion

Category:Homeland's Gratitude Medal recipients, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:22, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Pavlić family

Unsourced, controversial.Xx236 (talk) 14:27, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

ARC 100 Croatia

This chart posted by Hrvatski Radio is being placed in song articles for chart peaks in Croatia. I was hoping to get confirmation that this is a notable and reliable chart or should I get a second opinion from the Croatian Wikipedia. I have also asked for opinions at WP:RSN and WP:CHARTS. Many thanks. Abi-Maria (talk) 17:25, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Croatia

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod ^talk 14:45, 3 December 2017 (UTC)