Talk:Giorgio da Sebenico

/Archive 1

Croatian 'sources'

I've removed

Croatian sources such as Yugoslav Lexicographical Institute and author Cvito Fisković claim that "Orsini" was never used by the artist and it was adopted by his son, after the death of his father.[6][7][14].

based on reading the archived discussion and finding this information from a really credible source

Dalmatia, the Quarnero and Istria, with Cettigne in Montenegro and the Island of Grado: With Cettigne in Montenegro and the Island of Grado By Thomas Graham Jackson Clarendon press, Oxford 1887 page 389

His family descent from the Orsini family was formally recognized in 1540 in the person of his grandson Giacomo, an advocate.

--Don Luca Brazzi (talk) 00:59, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

During his life he was never recorded as "Orsini". He was Georgius Dalmaticus in the documents. In Dalmatia personal names and surnames were usually translated to the Latin language in the documents (Georgius Dalmaticus), while spoken in Croatian in common usage (Juraj Dalmatianac). Orsini was used by his descendents! Never by himself! Zenanarh (talk) 09:06, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

A book of 1887 is unlikely to contain the last word on the matter. Johnbod (talk) 15:04, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Graham Jacksons' accomplishments notwithstanding, Johnbod is right. – Besides, the claim is clearly attributed & referenced; each reader can decide by himself what to think of it. :-) Regards, Ev (talk) 16:30, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

• • The Jackson's book clearly references a document found in the state archives of the Venetian Republic. Croatian 'sources' are just figment of wishes to write history the way it suits them.--MagnumCrimen (talk) 00:21, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• • • It's the only primary sources we have [1]: It states his native name was Giorgio Orsini, called by the people that time Giorgio il Dalmata. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theirrulez (talk • contribs) 00:49, 28 May 2010

References

When using sources and "sources", please follow Wikipedia guidelines strictly. There is a lot of bad and nationalistic writings coming from Croatia trying to persuade the world that those who were Italians (Polo, Orsini, Laurana, etc) were Croats. The "proving" manner is always the same - change a man's (Italian) name into some Croatian name.--Luciano di Martino (talk) 02:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh for goodness sake, you just outright removed JLZ references en masse as "unreliable", and added two Italian books dated 1917. What can I say - that's classic point-of-view pushing. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:48, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

I've made an effort and integrated the new content. There actually wasn't a whole lot of it, and I won't discard it as "unreliable" :P --Joy [shallot] (talk) 10:11, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

• JLZ 'references' are un-scholastic, based on figments of someone's imagination and projection of nationalistic attitude. Claim that 'there is only signature' and that he never used his name (Girogio Orsini) is a nonsense. His signature on the home purchase contract is "Giorgio Orsini".--Luciano di Martino (talk) 13:46, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately this article suffers from editors with both Italian and Croatian nationalist POVs. Removing en masse discussion of the issue does not help your case. Johnbod (talk) 15:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

That's great. Provide references for the said claim! Also try reading WP:NPOV. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:38, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

• You already got reference and the text quoted as "Michelle Simeonich, a nobleman of Sebenico, sold to Giorgio Orsini for two hundred golden ducats of just and good weight". In order to get the microfilmed copy of the home purchase contract, contact Venetian republic archive at [2]. Your 'integration' of the previously added text does not prove what you wanted to prove: Orsini was not Orsini. Two references are proving the opposite. As to the reading, my advice to you is to read and learn more about civilty and academic attitude and ethics.--Luciano di Martino (talk) 14:31, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

The source quoted in the article says that a bear was carved onto the house, an emblem of the Orsinis. However, there are two obvious issues with that - the article House of Orsini fails to mention any such emblem (at least I don't see a bear on the coat of arms pictured there) and the reference uses editorializing style so it doesn't seem any less fishy than e.g. the JLZ claims.

The claim is a baseless disqualification of a reference. Calling upon a Wikipedia's article is another bad step; Wikipedia is disqualified by scholars and academics, and, therefore, not recognized as a valid academic and scholar source. Here is another, online available, source about Orsini nobility heraldics: "The old bell tower is decorated with a Roman funerary relief, while the church has a couple of bears holding a rose: the rose is an element of the Orsini's coat of arms, while the bear (orso in Italian) is a traditional reference to the Orsini." [3]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.19.40 (talk • contribs) 17 November 2011‎

The policy about sourcing is pretty clear - you should cite sources that are verifiable. Providing contact information for a library and linking some apparently personal website doesn't have much more weight than making statements on talk. Please read Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:15, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

So, once again, to be able to claim your point of view is so superior to all others that others do not even deserve to be mentioned (other than by way of ridicule), you need to provide more tangible proof that that is possible, otherwise it's a blatant violation of WP:NPOV. In fact, I googled the listed reference and came up with these snippets, where the second entry says that his grandson "was formally recognized as a bonafide Orsini", implying that his predecessors weren't recognized as such. I'd first read those entire two pages before even attempting to cast judgement as bluntly as you have. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 13:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

There is no nonsense here... Juraj and Giorgio mean the same thing: "George". The former is the Slavic version, the latter Italian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.227.7.129 (talk) 03:22, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia as a propaganda tool

Juraj Dalmatinac is a nonsense invented by Croatian 'historians'. Europe does not know anything about Juraj, only about Giorgio.

Please, make Wikipedia free of nonsense and enyclopaedic by filtering out the nonsenses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.229.6 (talk) 01:44, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• So Messer Antonio gave place to Messer Giorgio Orsini of Zara. He came of the noble and ancient house of the Orsini — the little bears — of Rome, but his branch of this noble family had come down in the world and had earned its living with hand and brain;
  
  from Dalmatia by Oona Howard Butlin Ball, Faber & Faber limited, 1932 page 107

Editorial, factual accuracy - Early life section

This paragraph

• His name and origin has been the source of some controversy. On the relief by the north apse of Cathedral of St.James the artist signed in Latin: "hoc opus cuvarum fecit magister Georgius Mathaei Dalmaticus",[5][6] and on a contract from 1441 he signed: "Georgius lapicida quondam Mathei de Jadra Civis Sibenicenis" (trans. "Georgius sculptor son of Matheus from Zadar citizen of Šibenik").[6] Those are only known signatures of the artist, however, in Sebenico there are remnants (the doorway) of the Orsini's home which he bought in June 1445 from M. Simeonich, a local nobleman. On the lintel of this old doorway is carved a bear, the heraldic emblem of the noble house of Orsini - carved by Giorgio's own hand.[7] That is why he is also referred to as Giorgio Orsini, particularly in Italian sources.[8][9][10] There are also references to him as Giorgio Dalmatico,[8] or as George the Dalmatian.[11] He is sometimes listed among Croatian sculptors in English-language sources.[11] In Croatia, he is known under the Croatian name Juraj Dalmatinac (lit. "George the Dalmatian"). Two elementary schools in Croatia bear that name: one in Pag,[12] and one in Šibenik.[13] This name is stated to be a recent translation of Georgius Dalmaticus by some Italian sources.[1][14][15] This is reportedly part of a trend of Croatization of old Venetian names.[16][17] Croatian sources such as the Yugoslav Lexicographical Institute and author Cvito Fisković claim that "Orsini" was never used by the artist and it was adopted by his son, after the death of his father.[5][6][18]

suffers from an editorial approach offering arbitrary conclusion based on very narrow selection of (Croatian) sources. These sources are not referencing any valid and existing documents or records dated back to the times of Orsini's life and work. In particular:

• His name and origin has been the source of some controversy. -> personal, editorial opinion not found in English language references
• Those are only known signatures of the artist ... -> false statement; a reference is available, quoting a home sale contract where Giorgio Orsini was named as the home buyer.
• That is why he is also referred to as Giorgio Orsini, particularly in Italian sources. [8][9][10] -> editorial opinion defeated by, at least, 100 English language references using exclusively his correct names (Giorgio Orsini). Reference [8] is not Italian source, it's English book translated into Italian.
• Two elementary schools in Croatia bear that name: one in Pag,[12] and one in Šibenik.[13] -> this sentence is completely out of the context; all section is of biographical type and about Orsini's early life
• This name is stated to be a recent translation of Georgius Dalmaticus by some Italian sources.[1][14][15] This is reportedly part of a trend of Croatization of old Venetian names.[16][17] -> both sentences are an editorial opinion about references
• Croatian sources such as the Yugoslav Lexicographical Institute and author Cvito Fisković claim that "Orsini" was never used by the artist and it was adopted by his son, after the death of his father.[5][6][18] -> apparent nonsense defeated by the existence of the home sale contract available in a microfilm record in the Venetian state archives.

Proposed improvements

• Fix the year of his death (1473 -> 1475)
• Add his real name into the lead paragraph. There is enough and firm evidence what his, given at birth names, were. References (Giorgio da Sebenico[1][2][3]) used to "prove" that his real name was "da Sebenico" are claiming just the opposite: Orsini ([1][2], the third one is a defunct link)
• Remove completely the above mentioned paragraph
• Add separate paragraph "Juraj Dalmatinac" where shall be explained origins and use of this name and the Croatian attitude toward this Italian medieval sculptor and architect.--71.191.19.40 (talk) 21:40, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

If this is User:Luciano di Martino, please log in. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:40, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

No. Comment on content only, please.--71.191.19.40 (talk) 21:08, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

• To 71.191.19.40: Do not waste your time trying to improve this article. The article is "fixed" the way that reader shall believe that Orsini was not Orsini, therefore Juraj Dalmatinac, therefore a Croat. A primitive nationalistic propaganda which I see on many places in Wikipedia: their terrorist Zvonko Busic (who killed a policeman and wounded three others) is emigrant and freedom fighter, Starcevic, who was a provincial politician and rabid racist - democrat, writer, etc, etc. Wikipedia is no more than a disordered blog.--Eleven Nine (talk) 13:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Not really, but the article has been plagued by (frankly) obsessive Italian nutters and obsessive Croatian nutters, none of whom are actually in the slightest bit interested in Georgio or his work except as a nationalist trophy. Johnbod (talk) 14:01, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Exactly, and this user is no exception - they just continue the same trend. I forced myself to read through the latest diatribe and fixed one of the glaring problems they mentioned, but the bulk of the complaint has no less glaring problems of their own, such as the obvious sockpuppetry, silly insistence that there is in fact no controversy whatsoever (when there's obviously several sources using "Giorgio da Sebenico", IOW there's no consensus that the Italian-language title is "Giorgio Orsini"), and constant refering only to their "source" which they completely fail to quantify according to established standards. In any case, all of us continuing to complain about whatever nationalism is really orthogonal to the article - how to edit articles is very well known, the policies on verifiability and referencing are pretty clear, we all know what to do. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:56, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

• To Johnbod: Please comment on content, not on users! Giorgio Orsini was a medieval Italian and a representative of Italian Renaissance. Street language as "nationalist trophy" is not welcome here along with the rest of your comment.--71.191.19.40 (talk) 23:19, 3 December 2011 (UTC)