Talk:Republika Srpska/Archive 7
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Republika Srpska. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
Why are you hard trying to tell that name country is Srpska?
Srpska mean Serbian, that is adjective and it is not name of country. That adjective is saying that that land belongs to Serbia and Serbian people. You can fool people who don't speak Serbo-Croatian language and you are not telling the truth this way. 178.222.79.245 (talk) 22:53, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- The official web page of the government uses "Republic of Srpska", see [1]. I guess they do speak Serbo-Croatian. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:43, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Reverted changes to lead
DadoNYC has made some WP:BOLD changes to the lead. However, as none of the sourcing or text in body has changed, these are unsupported. Sourcing needs to be provided as our own interpretation or understanding of events is insufficient under verifiability policy as a reliable source must support inclusion of the information. Slywriter (talk) 18:38, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
The article makes false statements and I have to prove it otherwise? DadoNYC (talk) 18:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- There is text and sources in the body that support the current version of the lead. So yes, you need to provide sources to show that the existing text and sources are wrong.Slywriter (talk) 18:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- The lede uses "internationally recognised", which isn't the form of words used in the main text. In the main text, the claim is that the Dayton Agreement recognised Republika Srpska as an entity of Bosnia (sourced to the Agreement itself, so a primary source). At the very least, "internationally recognised" requires a secondary source. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Why Pre-Dayton history
Why is there a set of historys coverered in this article that can be found in the general section on BiH history? there is no corresponding section in the Federations page? RS is not a state, but a political entity within BiH and as such, should this pages histry start in 1993? --✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 23:52, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Please remove Demographic history of RS
There should be removed Demographics history of RS same as it has been done on site about Croatia and separate article should be created about it, again same as done for Croatia. It seems as Wikipedia is hiding certain information and exposing it on another side as propagandist would to, not historians. It should be same standard applied everywhere. 21:28, 22 October 2023 (UTC)166.198.249.12 (talk) 166.198.249.12 (talk) 21:28, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Pink region on the map
I looked a the map, and didn't know if RS was red or white. I looked at other sources, and found out the the red part was RS.
However, what is the pink region in the upper right hand corner of the map? Axsvl77 (talk) 02:41, 24 January 2024 (UTC)