Jump to content

Talk:Bosniaks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 83.67.3.166 (talk) at 23:15, 4 December 2007 (→Third opinion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconEthnic groups B‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Template:TrollWarning

/Archive1: - June 2006
/Archive 2 - October 2007 (primarily)

Important Dates in Bosniak history

I will have to agree with Montenegro Interactive, the dates I removed only have to do with Bosniaks of Bosnia and Herzegovina and not with Bosniaks in general, even if 90% of Bosniaks are from Bosnia. What about the 10% of Bosniaks outside of Bosnia and Herzegovina that aren't from Bosnia, i.e. from Montenegro, Serbia or the Republic of Macedonia? Aren't dates from the Bosniaks there important as well? Either way, I have created the Bosniaks of Bosnia and Herzegovina for the following reasons: to explain the Bosniaks of Bosnia and Herzegovina and to keep the article about Bosniaks to be about Bosniaks in general, and not mostly about the Bosniaks of Bosnia and Herzegovina. --Pointe LaRoche 00:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please, don't remove important dates of Bosniaks, because some can think that you are malicious and that you are a sockpuppet of Montenegro Interactive which means you can be blocked indefinitely. The source about the dates of Bosniaks is "History of Bosniaks" by Imamovic Mustafa. Btw, what about the dates of Turkish people in Germany, or Irish people in USA? Bosniaks are identified with Bosnia as an ethnic state, just as Irish people with Ireland, no matter where they live. Also, there isn't article called Irish of Ireland, just Irish. If you continue to misuse Wikipedia, I will devote my life to follow your edits and you sockpuppets. Bye. 85.158.33.85 00:52, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Bosniaks aren't Bosnians! Bosniaks kept there heritage in Bihor, a region in Montenegro, not in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and are true Bosniaks. When the Bosniaks in Montenegro were gaining notability, that's when the Bosnian Muslims decided to go with them and began to declare themselves Bosniaks. Bosniaks aren't ethnically tied to Bosnia, either, except for those who are from Bosnia. BTW, Mustafa Imamović was a Bosnian Bosniak, there is a difference. This article, as per what Pointe LaRoche says, shouyld be about Bosniaks in general, not mostly about the Bosniaks in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and no, Mr. LaRoche isn't my sockpuppet. For God's sake, I don't even know who he is. --Montenegro Interactive 02:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are no true or false Bosniaks. Please, restrain yourself from racist arguments. I will report you, and Pax, and other sockpuppets who do this. "Bosnian Muslims" decided to become Bosniaks, according to whom?! My grandfather and whole family always called themselves Bosniaks, or "Bošnje" (in Bosnian) and they are from the bottom of Bosnia. Now, your claim confirms your racist motive. You deny Bosniaks to be Bosniks, saying that Bosnian Muslims decided to be Bosniaks?! It is the main cause of genocide committed on Bosniaks by Serbs helped by Montenegrins (Novak Kilibarda), because they denied Bosniaks to be Bosniaks. Ottomans called my people Bosniaks, Njegoš called them Bosniaks, and they called themselves Bosniaks. And when you say that "real" Bosniaks are from Montenegro, and that they don't have ties with Bosnia, how possibly do they have Bosnia in their ethnic name? A little common sense wouldn't kill you. 85.158.33.136 09:34, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, Šako and Dado Polumenta are Bosniaks from Montenegro and they don't have any ethnic ties to Bosnia nor are from Bosnia. Neither does Jašar Ahmedovski from the Republic of Macedonia. Nor Emina Jahović, her brother Mirsad and Elma Sinanović, who are all from Novi Pazar in Serbia. What about Rasim Ljajić, the only Bosniak minister in the Serbian government? Not even him. And I can continue with this list if you would like me to. --Montenegro Interactive 02:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care about Šako and Polumenta, I don't even know who they are. Emir Kusturica also doesn't have any ethnic ties to Serbia, nor Ivo Andric, and they are Serbs. If you want to write about them, that's ok, but this is racism. 85.158.33.136 09:34, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rascism?!?!?! How is this rascism? I myself come from a Montenegrin-Bosniak family. Those people I mentioned have no ethnic ties to Bosnia, that's what I meant for all those people. --Montenegro Interactive 21:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care about Montenegro. If you want to write about it, I don't care, but if you continue to write lies about Bosniaks, I will also write smth about Montenegrins, such as their genocide role against my people in cooperation with Slobodan Milosevic.
Your people are the Bosnian Muslims that turned to Bosniakhood after the Bosniaks in Sandzak began gaining notability with the Bosniak nation. The Montenegrins didn't genocide, they only helped out of fear because Serbia was "bigger and better" and since Montenegro was small, they didn't want war to come to them out of fear because they feared that Serbia would crush and say good-bye to Montenegro. Think about it. --Montenegro Interactive 18:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Listen here, buddy. Thanks to Šerbo Rastoder and other Bosniaks from Montenegro, the Bosniak name came back. What you are being told are lies. BTW, my family as I said is Bosniak, but they aren't tied with Bosnia in any way whatsoever. --Montenegro Interactive 13:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your sentences are contradict. First, I don't believe you, and I don't care. Second, you say that Bosniak name came back, as it didn't exist before, and after that you say you are from Bosniak family?! So your lies are clear. 85.158.32.121 22:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Who says you have to believe me? You believe whatever you want to believe, but I am truthfully telling you what is the truth. You have been told lies, my friend. The Bosniak nation (and name) existed before but you fail to realise that. The Bosniak name and culture was kept with the Bosniaks of Bihor (in Montenegro) (who were known as Muslims at that time), not the Bosniaks of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Bosniaks from Bihor are what everyone in Montenegro call "the place where true Bosniaks are from", of which my family is from. You fail to realise that as you were told a propogandist story of the Bosniak nation and its history. O, and my, I do come from a Bosniak family who fought for the Bosniak nation. My grandfather, a Bosniak, was a big speaker for the Bosniaks in the Montenegrin parliament. He fought hard for Bosniak rights, however, he died before he was able to see what name the Bosniaks have now and one of his long awaited dreams, to see Montenegro become independent. I'm even fighting for Bosniak rights just like my grandfather once did. So, you can't say I don't come from a Bosniak family, because I do. --Montenegro Interactive 18:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nor are any of my other Bosniak friends in Montenegro. So you believe what you want to believe since we do have different views on different topics. --Montenegro Interactive 13:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Montenegrins committed genocide against Bosniaks, so I see what is your goal here, but no pasaran my friend. 85.158.32.121 22:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Montenegrins never committed genocide against Bosniaks during the Bosnian war. And if they did, find evidence to prove your biased accusation. And what is my goal? The only goal I have right know is to spread the truth about the Bosniaks, not some propogandist, biased lies. Most of the article about Bosniaks are about the Bosniaks of Bosnia and Herzegovina and their history, not about the Bosniaks in general.--Montenegro Interactive 18:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored an unreferenced tag to this section. I propose removing the section completely to stop this edit-warring if no sources can be provided. --Ronz 22:18, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't about the dates anymore, this is about a war about Bosniaks. --Montenegro Interactive 02:25, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if it isn't about creating a good wikipedia article by following wiki policies and guidelines then it's not going to remain in its current form for much longer. --Ronz 17:19, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is about you who are malicious and who want to fabricate the facts. I can understand what happened during the war, but I don't understand why again and here?! 85.158.32.121 22:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added the reference ISBN 9958-815-00-1 given by 85.158.32.21, along with a failed verification tag. If anyone can list the dates actually provided from this source, we can just remove the others and be done with it. --Ronz 23:56, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Moved from article for verification: Important dates to Bosniaks

I removed the above from the 18:09, 31 August 2007 version [1]. We now have two references that fail to verify the list. I don't think we should add any list back at all until we get complete quotes from references we intend to use, then make a list using only the dates listed in the references. The references so far are:

  • Imamović, Mustafa (1996). Historija Bošnjaka. Sarajevo: BZK Preporod. ISBN 9958-815-00-1
  • Enver Imamović, Korijeni Bosne i bosanstva, Sarajevo 1995

--Ronz 18:44, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just oppose adding the first three - because it doesn't make pretty much sense to add them. That's all. --PaxEquilibrium 20:32, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would generally oppose keeping most of these dates as these dates only have to do with the Bosniaks of Bosnia and Herzegovina. But of course, no one will listen to me. So instead, I'll give you my list of which ones to remove because I don't see why they are needed in the first place:
--Montenegro Interactive 01:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the perspectives. Hopefully this will simply come down to what can be verified. --Ronz 17:27, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Montenegro Interactive pretty much got it. --PaxEquilibrium 18:48, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Validation

This is clear example of Serb intention against Bosniaks. ICJ ruled that Serbs had specific intention to destroy Bosniaks in Eastern Bosnia. It was called genocide. I think this is the same thing here, because I gave you two sources to confirm the dates, which are important to Bosniaks (You Serbs shouldn't worry about it, because those dates are important to Bosniaks, not to Serbs, so you don't have to delete it, if you don't like it; no more genocide behaviour). But, if you like, I will validate this dates, not because of you (it is pretty clear what are you trying to do here), but for those who wants to read it:

  • 29 August 1189 (Page 32, "History of Bosniaks" - II Chapter (Birth of Bosnian state))
  • 3 July 1436 - (Page 15, "History of Bosniaks" - Introduction)
  • 25 October 1478 Death of Katarina Kosača-Kotromanić, last Bosnian Queen, in exile in Rome (Page 114, "The roots of Bosnia and Bosnianhood" -E.Imovic - "Do we need a queen?")
  • 29 March 1831 - The Great Bosnian uprising (Page 333, "History of Bosniaks")
  • 25 November 1943 - Day of the republic (It is celebrated every year by Bosniak Institutions, and in Bosniak dominated parts of Bosnia; Also it is still legal holiday according to Deyton agreement)
  • 2 May 1991 - Day of the Patriotic league (It is celebrated every year by Bosniak Institutions)
  • 1 March 1992 - The Independence day (It is celebrated every year by Bosniak Institutions, and in Bosniak dominated parts of Bosnia)
  • 15 April 1992 - Day of the Army of Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (today day of Bosniak unit - part of Defence forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina) (Celebrated according to military law of Bosnia and Herzegovina)
  • 7 May 1993 - Day of mosques (Page 259, "Takvim 2007")
  • 28 September 1993 - (Page 17, "History of Bosniaks" - Introduction)
  • 11 July 1995 - (Page 259, "Takvim 2007")

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.158.33.176 (talk • contribs) 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, you shouldn't be calling us Serbs, as they may be a personal attack to some, like me. I am no Serb, I am a proud Montenegrin Bosniak. If you have a problem with this, then go to the Bosniaks of Bosnia and Herzegovina article. This is the reason why it was created. What we are trying to do on the "Bosniaks" article is the make the article to talk about Bosniaks in general, not mostly about Bosniaks of BiH, something you are trying to do and for that reason, I believe you should go and do you business in the Bosniaks of BiH article, as mentioned earlier. --Prevalis 00:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed it until another editor validates it, given with the past problems we've had with editors erroneously claiming sources properly validated the information. --Ronz 19:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Further, this could be a case of WP:OR, given that the notes above indicate these dates are found across multiple pages of multiple sources. --Ronz 19:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"ICJ ruled that Serbs had specific intention to destroy Bosniaks in Eastern Bosnia. It was called genocide." The ICJ did no such thing. See the ICJ press release that makes it quite clear:
(2) by thirteen votes to two,
Finds that Serbia has not committed genocide, through its organs or persons whose acts engage its responsibility under customary international law, in violation of its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide;
(3) by thirteen votes to two,
Finds that Serbia has not conspired to commit genocide, nor incited the commission of genocide, in violation of its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide;
(4) by eleven votes to four,
Finds that Serbia has not been complicit in genocide, in violation of its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide;
(5) by twelve votes to three,
Finds that Serbia has violated the obligation to prevent genocide, under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in respect of the genocide that occurred in Srebrenica in July 1995;
--Philip Baird Shearer 08:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Philip: Western people know what happened, no matter what the Serbs and Russians paid the ICJ officials, we saw death camps in the western media, so it's too late for people like you fortunately. Holocaust deniers are just that Holocaust deniers. Fortunately it is standard practice that nobody really takes them seriously. 83.67.73.117 22:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slavic Muslims

The article is written from the perspective that Bosniaks are Slavic Muslims. If you disagree, please discuss rather than edit-warring. Thanks! --Ronz 19:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As soon as we take 100,000 Bosniaks DNA sample and conclude that they are a Slavic/Servic tribe, they sure look different to me and any western visitor. Servs appear similar to Gypsies, and Bosniaks have blonde hair mostly and blue eyes, last time I visited Bosnia. So the most educated approach would be not to mention the word "Slavic" untill concrete genetic test brings about such evidence, am I right? Or are we going to go against recognised professional methods of reaching conclusions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BosnianHolocaustSurvior (talk • contribs) 01:46, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from ouright racist remarks like that. One cannot distingush between a Serb and Bosniak by mere appearance Hxseek 02:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One is not being offensive at all about "the Gypsi appearance" so there's nothing racist there. One is just providing observation value to the subject. One might say that Serbs do not look like Afghans which is a valid scientific and factual observation, which can be used to prove that Serb cultural heritage is unlikely to be of Afghan origin.83.67.73.117 10:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is completely erroneous to suggest most Bosniaks are blonde haired/blue eyed. The fact is, Bosniaks, are, and always have been Slavs. Serbs, Bosniaks, Croats, Macedonians, Slovenes all have similar physical appearances. So please try and distinguish the Bosniak nation by other means, such as their unique culture; not all this pseudo-scientific "Bosnaiks are really Scandinavians" crap. Frvernchanezzz 07:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've provided a very good reason

User "Ancient Land of Bosoni" continues to promote a biased view of Bosnian history, treating Bosniak Muslim and Bosnian-Herzegovinian historical figures as virtually the same. According to his view, Bosniaks are the only legitimate heirs to Bosnian history and culture. Nevermind the cultural legacy of Bosnian Croat Franciscans and others. Bosnian Croats and Serbs who consider themselves Bosanci as well do not factor at all, according to him.

At least acknowledge that King Tvrtko was a Christian monarch, and the steccak tombs were erected by members of all three churches alike. If you want a good page to post those pictures, I suggest you direct them to the Wikipedia page on Bosnians. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.235.39.246 (talk) 22:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, so.. I fail to see the problem. Croats and Servs/Serbs may share the same heritage, and everybody knows that people of the "Ancient Land of Bosoni" have not been driven out, as there is zero evidence of any conquest of those people by Servian Slavic tribe. BosnianHolocaustSurvior 01:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not describe these bosnian monuments and kings as solely Bosniak, if you read carefully it says 'Bosnian' not 'Bosniak'. Ancient Land of Bosoni —Preceding comment was added at 19:45, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bosnians and Bosniaks

If Bosniaks (Bošnjaci) want to be a people, it is fine, why not. Who are Peruvians, as an example. Citizens of an country. So bosniaks want to be recognized as new nation, members of an country. But in their wish, they must not endanger other Bosnians (Bosanci), Bosnian croatians and Bosnian Serbs. If we agree, Bosnians are citizens of Bosnia, disregard of their religion, and Bosniaks are people from Bosnia with muslim religion. For moment two terms are more or less one. --Billy the lid 11:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong, not all Bosniaks are from Bosnia. The term "Bosniak" is now generally being applied to Muslims in the countries of former Yugoslavia. --Prevalis 22:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Number inflation + Population estimates

People, please stop inflating the population - especially the Total Population estimate. The fact is, the total population is only, and can only be an estimate. It is incorrect to insist on keeping the estimate at 2.8 million, especially after you add up the number in the "Regions with significant populations" sections; the total comes to just over 2.4 million. Unless hard evidence can be found of these 400 000 that someone insists belong here, the population estimate should stay at 2.4 million. Frvernchanezzz 05:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Important Dates in Bosniak history - yet again

Please see WP:SYN. The list appears to be nothing more that dates taken from various sources that the editors, not the sources, deem important to Bosniak culture. What I think would be clearly acceptable is a list from single reliable source on Bosniak culture. For anything else we will need to demonstrate that we're not the ones deciding what dates are deemed culturally important. --Ronz 17:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you quote it? Appears to whom? The sources are well known to every Bosniak on Earth. For example Takvim is one of the four books every Bosniak home has. It contains the calendar and the list of dates that Bosniaks celebrate every year, so please don't behave like a vandal removing that fact or get the source and check it for yourself. 85.158.33.106 18:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No they don't. Maybe Bosnian Bosniaks but not Montenegrin Bosniaks. --Prevalis 19:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can you provide a source to back that Takvim is so widely owned?
Please observe WP:TALK, or other editors may be inclined to ignore your comments. --Ronz 01:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No need for this numbers

there is one thing i dont understand... and it is about this table on the right side(number of bosniaks not living in Bosnia and H.). why is there the number of muslims living in these countries? are they supposed to be bosniaks too?! like i would write(e.g. english people in China: 50000 (12 mil. christians))!? thanks!

WP:LEAD

The lead section is drifting away from WP:LEAD. It should summarize what is in the main article. It shouldn't be the main and sole place for presenting information. --Ronz (talk) 05:27, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Dates

As this is allegedly a free encyclopedia I re-added date section about important dates to Bosniaks. All dates are sourced so I don't see the problem here? Can anyone explain me the date section deletion? Grandy Grandy (talk) 20:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Bosniaks#Important_Dates_in_Bosniak_history Talk:Bosniaks#Moved_from_article_for_verification:_Important_dates_to_Bosniaks Talk:Bosniaks#Important_Dates_in_Bosniak_history_-_yet_again --Ronz (talk) 21:43, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So the problem is...?! Where is the explanation? Grandy Grandy (talk) 06:49, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Bosniaks#Important_Dates_in_Bosniak_history_-_yet_again --Ronz (talk) 18:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin,

{{editprotect}}

There is a contradiction in the article. It says "Most Bosnians are Muslim". Earlier on however it says that they are only 40%, and therefore constitue perhaps a plurality rather than a majority. Therefore I kindly request the admin to replace the words "Most Bosnians" to the words "A plurality of Bosnians" or something to those lines.Tourskin (talk) 05:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesn't. It says "most Bosniaks are muslim". That K makes a big difference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.170.64.169 (talk) 07:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
☒N article does not have that specific phrase. SkierRMH (talk) 09:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Which causes the same problem actually, so there is a contradiction still as per CIA claims which state that Bosniaks are not exclusively of Muslim religion. In fact I went to Bosnia recently and I've yet to meet a religous person amongst the Bosniak population. They seem to have lost all trust in religion after the Genocide they've endured. 83.67.73.117 20:54, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tip of advice, you shouldn't have said that they seem to have lost all trust in religion because believe it or not, many Bosnian Bosniaks are deep into religion, especially Islam. You should watch Bosnian TV more and read Bosnian Bosniak sites more often. :) --Prevalis 21:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I do, and you're wrong, because Bosnian media is run by the West and it's loaded with things like "Friends" and American+European films. I've been there last year, and got bored of it. There is common mourning of mass graves and stuff like that with people filmed praying, but that's about the only praying those people do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.67.73.117 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Zzzzzzzz.....run by the West? Heard that a billion times, and that's where you're wrong. They only syndicate foreign programming because they don't have much programming of their own and need that extra airtime to be filled. Am I the only with common sense? --Prevalis 21:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great so you've gone back on your previous statements. Secondly, western powers have many military bases in Bosnia and pull all the decision making strings, unfortunately for Russia. It wouldn't be a mature dispute, to dispute that. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.67.73.117 (talk • contribs) 30 November 2007 (UTC)
You shouldn't be making obvious statement like yours because many already know this. --Prevalis 23:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My appologies.83.67.73.117 10:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not all Bosnians are Muslim, but most Bosniaks are Muslims. Whether or not they are practicing Muslims is irrelevant; they still belong to the religion - I doubt all 1 billion Catholics go to Church every Sunday, but it doesn't stop them from being counted as Catholics. Frvernchanezzz 11:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ. Not all Bosniaks are Muslim as per definition in CIA.GOV and as per my personal observation that not only "not all Bosniaks are Muslim" but that Most Bosniaks(non Slavic) are not Muslim and affiliate themselves to being Bosniak and quite specifically have given up on religion entirely.83.67.73.117 12:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're not listening though - the sentence is Most Bosniaks are Muslim - this is 100% factually true - whether or not some (or even a significant minority) Bosniaks are not Muslim is irrelevant, as the majority are. Frvernchanezzz 07:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong title

"18th century Bosniak festival" painting actually represents "Liberation in WWII" (of Bihac, I think). Folks in the painting look oriental, but soldiers are WWII partisans. This painting is a known work of art. 99.229.96.231 00:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the painting cannot be properly identified, I think it should be removed per WP:V. --Ronz 17:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need for sources for this article!

For such a contentious subject matter as this appears to be it would be a great help if the article was properly sourced. Preferably with sources available online. Today, large parts of the text are completely unsourced. This may contribute to the disagreements. I've found a couple of sources which look to be both useful and reliable. If there are other, please add (or take out if you find them to be unsuitable, though please state why).Osli73 12:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Your sources seem to claim that Bosniak ethnic group is 2billion people strong. Muslim ethnic group? HAHAHAHA :D NeutralBosnian 13:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In ex-Yugoslavia Bosniacs were referred to as Moslem national group (capital M). So it's no HAHAHA. Term Bosniac emerged in late 1980's. 142.201.5.100 18:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Which goes to prove why it collapsed and how uneducated, fascist and baseless Yugoslavia was by using a religion to refer to an ethnic group which was quite possibly an attempt to airbrush a whole people which is precisely why we need to rely on genetics more in this article. Further - your 1980's claim is in contradiction with many sources used in this article. NeutralBosnian 18:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Quite the opposite. The term Moslem was the first term to describe the people that used to be called Turks (incorrect and probably insulting), or Serb-muhammedans (even Alija Izetbegovic used this term early on). 142.201.5.100 21:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is considered Serb/Russian/Slavophile hate-filled agenda for which NATO and Western powers acted with Airstrikes and Military action?

Please add all the typical nationalist Serb agenda's and arguments which can be used as to categorise some of the hate-driven comments in this article. This is aimed at identifying and stopping quickly the hate in this article.

For example I will add a few (please continue them on in an orderly fashion):

  • Serbs often want to make sure that Bosniak's and others in X-Yugoslavia do not have significant or different heritage to Serbs because that would mean they have the moral authority to exterminate or conquer those people, as was prevented in Kosovo by NATO.

NeutralBosnian 16:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that this section be removed per WP:TALK, WP:SOAP, and WP:BATTLE.
If you are concerned with problems of balance, bias, etc in the article, please read and follow WP:NPOV. --Ronz 19:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If Bosniaks feel they are victims of Serb/Russian hate-filled agenda's then that's what they feel.NeutralBosnian 20:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TALK clearly states, "The purpose of a Wikipedia talk page is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page. Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views." --Ronz 20:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are not my personal views, Bosniaks permit NATO on their ethnic lands, which proves that they do not consider Western powers as holding hate-filled agenda against Bosniaks. On the contrary, Bosniaks are very grateful for NATO military help and Western help in general. NeutralBosnian 20:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BATTLE clearly states, "Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, or nurture hatred or fear. Making personal battles out of Wikipedia discussions goes directly against our policies and goals."
WP:SOAP clearly states, "Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. This applies to articles, categories, templates, talk page discussions, and user pages." "Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view. You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views." --Ronz 01:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Philosophically speaking how can you categorize the view of every one in buble. I find it hard to believe that every Serb believes X. These are the views of whomever wrote the article. If the sourced information is not only verifiable but of WP:NPOV or notable enough to be mentioned then I see no reason why it can't remain. Might I highly recommend that we state "according to"... not just have a footnote. Ex.: According to "New York Times"... (put derogatory and racist comment here). --FR Soliloquy 06:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And this is exactly what this topic is aimed at cutting down on. :WP:BATTLE, :WP:SOAP and so on. As it is obviously trying to discourage Anti western and anti Bosniak Propaganda, battles, and unprofessional comments based on belittling Bosniak and non-Serb/Russian heritage and perspective. By the way, not every non-Russian perspective needs sources. We can't just have one sided Russian view on everything who Bosniaks consider as an enemy. Please see Pan-Slavism#Modern_day_developments for some pointers. NeutralBosnian 10:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinion

Hey. I'm not giving a third opinion, but I'm adding some text that was added to the 3O page. — HelloAnnyong [ t · c ] 19:03, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Ronz seems to be very unreasonable and uncivil, with active deletion of any content which doesn't favour Slavophile agenda. In that biast direction Ronz has dismissed and therefore insulted famous anthropologist and any possible Bosniak perspective. There is space for everybody's point of view, not just the Slavophile one. I have tried to reason with Ronz and have given up. Ronz has repeatedly Spammed and Vandalised Wikipedia pages which I tried to retrieve because they were repeats of topics already discussed and resolved in previous archives. I suggest Admin action on this. Please see Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:Ronz and Talk:Bosniaks. NeutralBosnian 18:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose this section be immediately archived per TALK. This is not a forum for such disputes and NeutralBosnian has already brought this up in four other forums, not including Third opinion. --Ronz 19:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose it remains here as a pointer to disruptive entities in the article, due to so much of it.83.67.3.166 (talk) 23:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference Imamovic was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Enver Imamović, Korijeni Bosne i bosanstva, Sarajevo 1995
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bosniaks&oldid=175808573"