Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Director (talk | contribs) at 09:46, 2 January 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

only 0,05% with 450,000?

maybe it's correct, but how come that there are 0,04% albanians when there are only 150,000 of them?

Denise Richards?? WTF??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.24.209 (talk) 00:01, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:CaryElwes.jpg

The image Image:CaryElwes.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. --06:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Related nations

In my oppinion we cannot write that Croatian Americans are related only to Croatians, Bosnian Americans, Serbo-Americans and Slovene Americans because if they consider themselves of Croatian descent then who are we to limit their related nations to some of the Slavic Americans and Croatians in general. I think that it is offencive to consider that Croatian Americans are only related to Croatians as if they were two different nations. Croatian Americans have the American citizenship and Croatians can have the citizenship of the Republic of Croatia and the citizenship of any other state (country) of the World. Direktor's position is false if he belives that Croatians are not related to Bulgarians, Macedonians, Montenegrins as well as all other South Slavic Nations. -- Imbris (talk) 00:10, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

The ethnic groups Croats are related to are Serbs, Bosniaks, Montenegrins, and (least of all) Slovenes. Its painfully simple, folks: the term "South Slavs" includes Bulgarians. An ethnic group Croats are not particularly related to (any more than some other Slavic ethnic groups, like Slovaks). While they are extraordinarily related to Serbs, Bosniaks, Montenegrins, and Slovenes. Therefore, there is no reason not to list the particular South Slavic ethnic groups Croats are related to, especially when they may not be anywhere near as related to other South Slavic nations.

While you may be Croatian nationalists, and you may dislike the fact that Croats, Bosniaks, Serbs, and Montenegrins are among the most "related" nations on the face of this planet, this is of no concern to Misplaced Pages, and is no reason to remove perfectly valid information. (Also, please try not to edit war. You're the ones trying to push this edit. It was contested, and I'm asking you to please have the decency to wait until discussions are over.) --DIREKTOR 00:11, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

This kind of behaviour is orriginal research at its core, who are you to insist that Slovenes are least of all related to Croatians. Where do you get such kind of information. It is not painfully simple as you put it. If you cannot understand Macedonian, why do you insist on nonsense that everybody doesn't know Macedonian which has lots of simmilarities with Bulgarian.

You speak of ethnic relations between nations and then claim only the simmilarity of languages as a standpoint. This is unacceptable.

Your "accusations" of a nationalist POV will not work here, as well as omitting Montenegrins. You are the one who insists on using a void phrase that Croatian Americans are related to themselves (Croats in general) and other Slavic Americans (of your particular choice). Plese stop this intimidating behaviour of expecting that your POV will stand in the article as long as we wait for someone to join the discussion. I will not wait for that momment in time because it is most NPOV to phrase ethnic relations with all of the South Slavic Nations.

Imbris (talk) 00:28, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

First of all, stop it with the Montenegrins. I did not originally write up the related ethnic groups list, and I obviously agree it is an oversight (which I repaired). Further, my logic is not "flawed". You are obviously trying to push this edit through with edit-warring. Whether or not your version is "NPOV" is your own opinion, which I ahappen to disagree here. Let me assure you that this will not work.

Now then, please do your best to respond to actual arguments: not once did I mention language. If you actually believe that Bulgarians are as "related" to Croats anywhere near as much as Bosniaks (for example), you're logic is undoubtedly tainted by nationalism. If you need sources to prove what is basically obvious, you're demand shall be satisfied:

• "The Serbs and Croats are two Southern Slav nations having many common traits.", Journal of Anthropological Research‎, page 156. Note that Serbs and Croats are singled out as having "many common traits", not Bulgarians and Croats.
• "...it is often forgotten how small the differences are among the current warring factions ", Genocide, an Anthropological reader by Alexander Laban Hinton, page 335.
• "In one of the most detailed accounts of ethnicity at the village level, Bringa (1996) shows that (...) the cultural differences between the groups are negligible..." Social Identity, Intergroup Conflict, and Conflict Reduction, by Richard D. Ashmore, Lee J. Jussim, David Wilder.

etc, etc... I found this in 10 minutes, and can by all rights use it to source the removal of your edit. These scholarly sources are just a few of many that can be used to confirm the extraordinary similarity between Croats, Serbs, Bosniaks, and Montenegrins. Do you have sources that confirm the allegedly equal similarity between Croats and Bulgarians? --DIREKTOR 09:36, 2 January 2009 (UTC)