Jump to content

Talk:Serbs/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

Accuracy sources

Interestingly, I looked at some sources the number of Serbs. Wrongly interpreted under.

  • www.blic.rs/Vesti/Drustvo/266353/Cetiri-miliona-Srba-naslo-uhlebljenje-u-inostranstvu- gives 10.5 million, no word on the 12 million.
  • www.serbianunity.com/serbianunitycongress/statistic]-Page does not work, under construction
  • [СТАНКО НИШИЋ. Хрватска олуја и српске сеобе. Београд, 2002.] in the book also writes (На пример, проф. др Гречић, који своје податке базира на изворима завичајних удружења Срба у дијаспори, наводи да Срба ван Савезне Републике Југославије и Републике Српске има 1,940.000.) Serbs outside the Republic of Yugoslavia and the Republic of Serbian has 1,940.000.
  • www.frontal.rs/index.php?option=btg_novosti&catnovosti=0&idnovost=19032 Source of four sentences! ("Што се тиче дијаспоре, Срба има између два и по до четири милиона, у зависности шта се све узима у дијаспору, а шта у регион",) Serbs have between 2,5 to 4 million, This is some sort of interview ridiculously :).
  • ec.europa.eu/languages/euromosaic/hu5_en.htm- (Serbian [Srpski] is a South Slavic language closely related to Croatian. It is spoken worldwide by about 12 million people most of whom (approximately 6.7 million) live in Serbia.) all is clear, the source speaks about language, not of nation.

In the article Slavs five contributors, is also changed number.--Sokac121 (talk) 10:37, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


Hello? There was an already reached concensus over this and we have been through this with you MILLION TIMES! ....

I believe vandalizing the same thing (figures of total population) on "Serbs" article over and over again by this clown is really unecessary to be tolerated. There was peace for few months, but now he is back with same complex. I vote for sanctions and i am serious. (Правичност (talk) 19:52, 30 August 2013 (UTC))

Sorry Правичност you did not say anything about my statements above. Please tell me something about it, we were mistaken in about it sources. No one is was reading what in them actually writes. Thanks--Sokac121 (talk) 20:49, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Whats to say.. for the millionth time...same discussions over and over again.. i can only agree about "serbianunity congress" source .. it may be removed if the "under construction" thing doesnt dissapear, but may be returned back later on when page is renewed. About other sources, there is nothing to discuss more... there are enough sources that mention 12 million. Its just a higher estimation and there are many sources that aproove, that such estimations exist. if the 12 million number bothers you, then just believe deeply inside yourself that the lower estimation is more right (based on Blic source) - no need to vandalize the figures again and again. There was a concensus about this stuff some time ago already... we`ve been through it 1 million and 500 thousand times (with or without you), no further discussions needed about it concerning me. Sorry! (Правичност (talk) 02:01, 31 August 2013 (UTC))

I read and read anywhere consensus. Again you have not analyzed the sources, what it actually writes.Five contributor is correct your changes in an article about the Slavs. Have you at all seen a new source that I have added in this article the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.--Sokac121 (talk) 10:03, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I am not giving you any more attention you internet hooligan. If you cant speak English then dont try it and there are no 5 contributors that removed my sources and claimed they arent good on Slavs, its just you! And another Croatian nationalist editor under name IvanOS who seems to be a big fan of Franjo Tudjman. Farewell (Правичност (talk) 15:04, 31 August 2013 (UTC))


We have discussed this problem before.. but ok. Nobody is negating that the lower estimate is true but we added the higher estimate (according to other examples on wikipedia) provided by this sources. The total number of any nation is not an exact science. There are variations, that is why we have a lower and higher estimate. I will copy them again.
  • Serbian Unity - In English, data presented by the ministry of Diaspora and NIN(am independent media publication).
  • Dr. Nišić`s book: 12 million (Online version of book "Croatian Storm and Serb migrations", by Dr. Stanko Nišić, Belgrade 2002) - (read end of page 14, under "2.Rasprostranjenost Srba") - The sentence "Укупно има око 12 милиона Срба, од чега их највише живи у отаџбинским земљама:" (In Latin script: Ukupno ima oko 12 miliona Srba) = in English "There are 12 million of Serbs total". If there is a problem with a translation, anyone can check this with google translate.
  • Demograpfh Stevo Pašalić`s statement: 12 million (Frontal.rs) - Headline "Пашалић: Срба има око 12 милиона" - In Latin (Pasalic: Srba ima oko 12 miliona) - in English "There are about 12 million Serbs (in the World)".
  • Serbian language speakers worldwide: 12 million (European Comission site (linguistic source)) - The linguistic site is clear.
I hope this clears the problems about the higher estimate of 12 million. Adrian (talk) 22:58, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Fall Iadrian yu:)

  • Serbian Unity -Page does not work, under construction:D
  • Dr. Nišić`s book: 12 million in the book also writes Serbs outside the Republic of Yugoslavia and the Republic of Serbian has 1,940.000.
  • Demograpfh Stevo Pašalić`s statement: 12 million Source of four sentences! Serbs have between 2,5 to 4 million, This is some sort of interview ridiculously :).
  • Serbian language speakers worldwide: 12 million (European Comission site (linguistic source)) - Serbian [Srpski] is a South Slavic language closely related to Croatian. It is spoken worldwide by about 12 million people most of whom (approximately 6.7 million) live in Serbia.) According to the census 2011 Serbia has 6.2 million Serbs In Serbia, Serbian language is also spoken part of the Roma, Croats, Bosnians ...:)

Please contributors to first read what others write then correspond. This now seems ridiculous. thanks!--Sokac121 (talk) 23:57, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I don`t believe I failed because I checked every source when I made this list.
  • Serbian Unity -Page does not work, under construction:D - Ok, did`t know that. When it was available, you saw it too. But ok, This is a dead source now. However I believe this page will came back online soon.
  • Dr. Nišić`s book: 12 million Why do I care what else is written? Does it contain the info about the total number of Serbs? Yes. That is all that I am interested in.
  • Demograpfh Stevo Pašalić`s statement: 12 million What`s wrong here? Stevo Pasalic is a demographer and this is an online source.
  • Serbian language speakers worldwide: 12 million (European Comission site (linguistic source)) - Ok, true. This is not a very accurate source but it confirms the number greater than the lower estimate.
I believe your analysis is ridiculous. I would like to ask you to read the sources too before declaring them void or focusing on other info in the source and claiming that it is wrong. Greetings. Adrian (talk) 00:24, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
frontal.rs and krajinaforce.com are separatist and nationalistic sources. Stevo Pasalic is defended the war criminal Radovan Karadzic to the Hague Tribunal. Look how Stevo explain the genocide in Bosnia and Herzegovina [1] this is terrible. --Sokac121 (talk) 10:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
True, web pages that HOST this books may be considered a little problematic but the web page does not provide this info, the book does. The web page is just hosting it, nothing more.Adrian (talk) 17:44, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

12 million, 11,5 [2] - (just coincedently found it) ... or 12,5 or 13 million... there are several estimations that exist and can be found on the internet, some even say 16 million and if croatian editors are bothered by 12 million, we can also find and put sources for 16 million serbs worldwide so they can finally relief :) ... but anyways we have a higher estimation of 12 million. The lower estimation is 10,5... Nobody knows the exact numbers and this is why lower and higher estimations exist on wikipedia, like adrian said. The sources mainly expose 12 million, so does the respected demograph Stevo Pašalić, so does Stanko Nišić etc... sources good enough as discussed million times before.(Правичност (talk) 00:18, 1 September 2013 (UTC))

Insanely, on a Serbian television was Jovan Deretić publicist, said that in Portugal 170,000 Serbs living, the Catalans declare themselves as Serbs, that live in India 100,000,000 million Serbs, Illyrians, Thracians, Dacians are Serbs, Rome they founded, guess who? :) ?!?.... I think he is a very good source for this article, it will easily fit into the source about the Serbs :D---Sokac121 (talk) 10:21, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

The book is also a nationalist. Look what in her all writes. Adrian you have not said anything about Stevo Pasalic fan of Radovan Karadzic.--Sokac121 (talk) 18:38, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
The book is nationalist because you say so? I don`t comment authors unless they have been proven unreliable. This is not the case. Adrian (talk) 20:05, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Protection

I've just fully protected this article for one week per this request. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:07, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Number of Serbs in individual countries, sources, table structure, etc.

Hello Pravičnost!

First of all, let me tell you that I find the way you adressed me/summarized your undoing of my edit (using words as "vandalizing" and "foolish edits") as very inapropriate and offensive. Let's not be pretentious and acting like you are a supreme arbiter of Wikipedia. It is not the point of this project, but cooperation and sharing of different information in order of creating more reliable and credible artciles. My only intetnion has been and still is to improve and made article more accurate.

You rightly pointed that Wikipedia is about sources but I would modified it and say it is about reliable sources. Reliable sources are not randomly picked articles on the Internet, which credibility cannot be proved and examined. I take it as my fault putting an obscure source for the number of Serbs in the New Zealand in the absecnce of the official data - I was driven by that "better something than nothing" policy so I tried to find any source whatsoever (since that country has become a significant destiantion of Serbian emigration in last two decades). However, when there are reliable sources such as the case with the United States, putting any other but official sources and data is simply not credible. That estimate of 1.8 million Serbs in the U.S. is ridiculous overstating found on some obscure site. Only source we can rely on when talking about number of Serbs in America are official data of U.S. Census Bureau form 2010 Census, and there are only two figures that can we rely on: one is for people who delared themselves as of Sebrian descent (187,731) and that of people of Yugoslav descent (327,131), for later is adequate to mention it in the footnotes. Same goes with Canada and Australia figure: for both of these countries official figures are available (72,609 and 69,544, respectively) and there is simply no need to put any other unofficial and arbitrary figures, no matter what sites they are reffered from. Those higher estimations should be putted in the footnotes but not on par with official figures in the table itself. On the other side, I think it's appropriate to reffer to unofficial sources in case of the country which doesn't have official data on ethnicity (such as France, Sweden, etc.). I also noticed that even the figure of Montenegro's speakers of Serbian language as a mother tongue on the table found its place - in presence of official data of people who declared their ethnicity as Serbian, putting that figure of Serbian speakers is nonsense and should be removed to the footnotes where it has been located previously.

As well, I undestand Wikipedia as place which is not about the game of making higher figures and putting some nonsense numbers just to make the point to the others (in this case Croats who you pointed as ones playing those games). We Serbs need to stick to real numbers, and let Croats drown in their own idyocies.

As for grouping of the regions with significant population, I don't get your a priori negative attitude towards that possible modification. That grouping has not been my invention but something that has proven useful and adequate in the number of articles for other peoples (article about Hungarian people, for example) where table is organized that way. It provides for better visibility and easier overview of the figures. It does groupings in four directions: one is for Serbia itself as mother-country of the Serbian people, second is for neigbouring countries where Serbs are autochtonous people (either as the contituent people such as the case in BiH, or recognized minority in the other countries, or something in between which is the case for official status of Serbs in Montenegro), and the others are for diaspora destionations.

You also mentioned, "self-handed calculations". I don't get how you find arbitrary and manipulative simple summation of the available numbers such as the case of that grouping of Serbia's neighbouring countries, when all data is available and official (with exemption of so-called independent Kosovo, which census has been largely boycotteed by our people downthere). Same goes for some other groupings ("North America" for example, where there are official figures for both the US and Canada, and simmply summing those two figures I don't find manipulative at all), for others there is an approximative figure based on data from respective countries (such as the case for "rest of Europe" category, where you can give an approximative figure based on individual figures and common-sense fact that 95% or even higher percentage of Serbian diaspora is found in the countries listed on the table).

I am looking forward getting a feedback from you and I hope you find this as a constructive discussion of making the Serbs article better and more accurate. I will restrain from making any edits before I get that feedback and see your opinion. I hope we find some common ground, if not we can bring this to some higher Wiki instances and let them decide...

Pozdrav i svako dobro, Klačko (talk) 21:23, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

This was discussed so many times and already concluded, you however (since this is more of a personal message) have my answer on my talk page. (Правичност (talk) 04:16, 1 December 2013 (UTC))

I completely agree with Klačko. We need to use the appropriate census data. Like this seems more accurate and precise, there is no nonsense about the number of speakers Serbian language.

Правичност fact that you are Serb, you do not have a greater right to edit articles from other contributors. You attacking other users on a national basis is a violation of the rights of Wikipedia, this is a terribly. I already said before, Klačko is exactly and clearly edited article, a lot of time is has spent that this edit. Please you stop the vandalizing article.--Ladimirevcanin (talk) 21:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC) --Ladimirevcanin (talk) 21:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Whoa, whoa, hold on there Jimmy boy, you should stop making things up. First of all i noticed the fact that your a Croat and that you make same edits/reverts and use same kind of English (by google translate) and same expressions and use same accusements against me... everything as same as user Sokac212 did, .. say now.. you wouldnt happen to be exactly him; using another computer with another username, to give your other editor username support in downgrading Serbian population on this article just as you tried months ago.. would you? :) ... aynways i dont care wht your bluffing about, the way you are stepping into conversation with me - with made up accusements... isnt going to lead us nowhere. Take Klacko for instance, he wrote down his arguments and ideas in a humane and normal way. (Правичност (talk) 01:24, 11 December 2013 (UTC))
Правичност is lying how all agreed with him. Klačko is neutral here, and so is the edited article.--Sokac121 (talk) 14:22, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Nope, i never lied about anything, we will see how this will end. But i do agree the article looks neutral now, just as same as the "Croats" article :). i think we should make more cooperations like this lol. (Правичност (talk) 01:07, 11 December 2013 (UTC))


There are two approaches, mine is conservative and restrictive and Правичност's is more flexible. Both of these are legitimate as the articles on other ethnicities take one or the other approach. Since the time of that edit which is is refferenced by Sokac121 and Ladimirevcanin, I want to acknowledge that Правичност and myself did some discussing on the subject at his talk page. Through a constructive dialogue we have reached a concensus on some issues while on the other issues we couldn't agree. I was going to do a somewhat different edit of infobox, but as the previous one seems to be the one currently presented in the article and the one that I still think is the most appropriate, I at the moment don't want to proceed with that modified edit of infobox but will rather do some minor edits and corrections in the rest of the article. So as far as infobox goes, I am completely fine with the way it is structured now. Regards, Klačko (talk) 16:24, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi,I would like to pint that there is official census data about Serbs in Germany and they number 197 000 people.There is a "link" or "source" here that say 700 000 and that is simply too much.Source is not so good.700 000 is just speculation.Just like it's speculation that there are 1,400,000 Serbs in Bosnia.Maybe there are but we will not know that until population census comes out.So i think we should put 197 000 people because that is official census that from Germany: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/Thematisch/Bevoelkerung/MigrationIntegration/AuslaendBevoelkerung2010200117004.pdf?__blob=publicationFile page 39 Scrosby85 00:27, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

I urge to Croatian editors not to go to edit war around some numbers in infobox because there is not point in that.Then some Serbian editors will come to Croatian article and so on... cheers Scrosby85 00:53, 13 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scrosby85 (talk • contribs)

Hello Scrosby i see you have rewoken with ideas about "too big numbers" on wikipedia; i must remind you that the source you are trying to present was already examined several months ago; the reason - simple : The German census 2011 simply didnt give its citizens a chance to ethnically identify. That 197,000 figure you are offering, shows how many people with "Rep. of Serbia" citizenship currently live in Germany. And we logically cannot use this figure and base how many ethnic Serbs or people of Serbian ancestry live in Germany. Many Serbs hold only German citizenships in Germany, some hold Bosnian ones, some Montenegrin, some Croatian and some others. The number 197,000 might inculde also a certain percentage of people of any other ethnic groups from Serbia. In 2006 there were something over 568,000 Serbs; more and more Serbs leave for Germany every year; the Ministry of Serbian diaspora puts a figure of ca. 800,000 Serbs in Germany and even up to 1 million. All of these arguments logically discredit your source. But thank you for your good faith propositions. (Правичност (talk) 01:00, 13 December 2013 (UTC))

Правичност It was just a suggestion nothing more.But that is just one ofe the official censuses.We can't hold the Ministry of Serbian diaspora for word because it is just a speculation.Same as some of the Serbian sites and "Serbs in Germany" which claim bigger number.I will give you this article.It's on Croatian you will understand it: http://www.tportal.hr/vijesti/svijet/215840/Koliko-je-Hrvata-u-Njemackoj-i-sto-rade.html.And?i should put that?If we take 700 000 Serbs in Germany for real number we can take the 500 000 Croats in Argentina number also for real because Argentinians of Croatan ancestry claimed few years ago rigt?:) Ok i will not touch anything here and remove.Unless.... Scrosby85 01:27, 13 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scrosby85 (talk • contribs)

yes i know Scrosby, well the link you gave is dead. You must know that - as i have told you - several years ago numbers for serbs were already put over 600,000 and its not surprising the number is this high. We have no other choice but to speculate, because using an old source from 2004 or 2006 (568,000) is already outdated due to newer estimations. Let me remind you also that majority of editors have already checked this source and accepted it. Serbian diaspora is way more numerous in Europe, while Croatian is way more overseas. Though Europe as a "home continent" and its countries being close to balkans and already numerous serbian communities in western europe are making sure that Serbian population lives on and grows even more, as its destinations are close and already popular for more Serbian emigrants. While overseas lands, as distant as they are are also culturaly distant and smaller peoples there assimilate more faster and more numerously than the ones in Europe, this is logical ofc. I saw multiple sources for Argentina stating 250,000 mostly, so i guess its an okay source eventhough i highly doubt any of those people speak Croatian anymore- a rough 20% maybe, if that much. While mutliple sources for germany and majority of them always state these numbers (between 600,000 and 800,000). there were some sources stating about 450,000, but those sources (which i checked) were mentioning only immigrants from Serbia and lets not forget there are alot of Bosnian and other Serbs in diaspora also - they probably make a half together against the ones from only Serbia (with KiM). This is why i find (and not only me) ca. 700,000 estimation a reliable number. But i have anyway complicated too much with this discussion... we must concentrate onto making a oncensus about both articles total populations i have wrote you my idea on Croats article, check it out pls. Regards. (Правичност (talk) 01:43, 13 December 2013 (UTC))
Disgraceful behavior Правичност, when has seen that his nationalistic attitudes will not be adopted, he started with a vengeance. Правичност needs to ignore, and if starts with vandalize and mistreatment communities we need him report it to administrators.--Sokac121 (talk) 12:16, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Shokac i know it hurts you when somebody makes an "answer" on your nonstop (several months) ANTI-SERBIAN "battles" on this article. I have made changes concerning concensus and agreements with Klačko; in which you havent participated, so dont make up stuff that you ever participated in any agreements here lately. All you ever did on this article is come down and RAID IT by removing any higher figure than 10 million total population. Thats all you ever did on this article, remove figures (also in infobox) that were too much for your "nazi stomach" - and you were doing these things for months and months - pure vandalism. Please restrain yourself from even commenting here, because nobody wants to listen to your Serbophobic frustrations. (Правичност (talk) 15:17, 13 December 2013 (UTC))
I was to late, someone beat me to reverting! But I will post it anyway:
Sokac121: I wanted to revert your edit, not necessarily because I agree with all the edits of Правичност, but because your blind edit is completely unconstructive. Some of the edits were "harmless" adjustments to bring the numbers in the text on par with the (sourced) numbers in the infobox. You also reverted the clean-up edits from the BG19bot, completely unnecessary. If you disagree with some edits, then confront those edits and discuss them. Revert war is getting you nowhere.
Правичност and Klačko: I find it disturbing that you have lengthy discussions in Serbian about this article on a user talk page. This, together with almost never using edit summaries, makes it look like you want to own this article, separately or together. That is unacceptable. In English Wikipedia we discuss the articles in English, and we do it on the talk page of the article. And we explain our edits in an edit summary. In that way other editors may contribute, even those of us who are not having a national interest in the theme. Regards! --T*U (talk) 15:23, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
T*U: I am sorry that discussion in Serbian between Pravičnost and me that we had in our personal talk pages got you disturbed. We started discussion in English and the essential part of the entire discussion was in English. We continued in Serbian discussing some minor things, but crucial parts i.e. the basic way and direction in which infobox sholud be edited, have been discussed in English. In this very talk page, just scroll just a little up, you will find that my stance on edits of infobox has been thoroughly explained, point by point. So, no need for you to come up with some conspiracy theory about us (Pravičnost and me) making some secretive arrangements since our talk pages are not closed but open and even discussion in Serbian is easily understood by concerned third parties (Croats, in this case, who seem to be most interested in the way how infobox of this article should look like). Last but not the least, way you adressed me I find a bit pretentious since you are not the one who arbitrarily decide which language I should use on my personal talk page; your complaint would be reasonable if discussion in Serbian was at this very page since this article is in English. Regards, Klačko (talk) 20:08, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
I just wanna agree; usage of Serbian language was simply more flexible for us at that moment of multiple discussions we needed to solve fast and is in no way of any harmful nature for this article, that is out of word. (Правичност (talk) 23:50, 13 December 2013 (UTC))
It became a problem when Правичност used the "agreements with Klačko" as an argument in an edit summary. I see now, however, that you have decided to continue in English, so I am not disturbed any more. Thank you! Regards! --T*U (talk) 10:07, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Issue with putting Bosnian in language section

@ Ivan Štambuk:

Please stop reverting edits and sticking to complete non-sense part of the sentence which says "apart from Bosnian". Apart from what? In that sentence it is simply stated that Serbian is official language in Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. What is wrong with that statement, what is your problem with this well-known fact of status of Serbian in both of these countries? If this continues I will have to report this to the admins and simply let them do the job. Regards, Klačko (talk) 22:58, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

I noteced this edit-war and I think that there is a missunderstanding here. @Ivan, the sentence only numbers the countries where Serbian language has official status. It doesn´t imply that Serbian is the only official language in those countries, those are two separate things. I think you missundestood the sentence. FkpCascais (talk) 02:03, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes it was an error on my part - I meant to put it in the following paragraph where it says that Serbian is the only language in Europe with digraphia which strikes me as doubtful. Standard Bosnian can also be written in two scripts, plus we have things like Romanian/Moldovan (same language in two scripts) and many minority languages with digraphia (e.g. Kurdish). It was unreferenced and later restored with what appears to be randomly googled paper that nowhere specifically substantiates that claim. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 09:27, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, the part of the sentence impliying that it is the only one using active digraphia can be taken out. FkpCascais (talk) 15:22, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Serbian scientist Nikola Tesla born in Croatia

Serbian scientist Nikola Tesla born in Croatia, one of the most important inventors in history.

Really? Born in Croatia? Also, he was Serbian-American scientist, and that is well known. Mm.srb (talk) 18:09, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

When we talk about people from the Austro-Hungarian period we must have into account that it was a multi-ethnic state, so people were not that much linked to the actual place where they were born but rather to the ethnic/cultural context of their family and origins. So that is why it isn´t at all unusual to have Slovak writters from Vojvodina, Serbian poets from Croatia, Croatian scholars from Banat, Czech inventors from Slavonia, Hungarian composers from Transilvania, German sportspeople from Srem, Austrian generals from Bosnia, etc. Not only the ethnic structure of the Empire was so complex, but also people were sent to work to other places of the empire. For instance, my great-grand father was a Czech engeneer from Prague sent by Austrians to Belgrade, Serbia, to project the construction of the railway to Istambul. He got inloved for a Serbian woman and got married, had children, etc. They ended up all staying and living in Belgrade, and slowly the new generations became Serbs (the children were half-Serb already). However there were also cases where entire families came from one region to another, lived and worked there for a while and then returned to their original homes. So you may find people of other ethnicity born in some other place in the Empire. And these are simple cases where birthplace may not correspond to the ethnicity of one person, not even going as far as well established ethnic minorities (Hungarians in Transilvania, Serbs in Croatia, Croats in Burgenland, Slovaks in Vojvodina, etc.) which is clearly the case of Tesla. FkpCascais (talk) 19:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Metaphysics aside, maybe I can clarify?
He was not born "in Croatia" (i.e. the Habsburg Kingdom of Croatia), but in the Croatian Military Frontier, a military region. A few decades after his birth the region did become a part of "Croatia" (i.e. the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia). All of those are autonomous subdivisions of the Austrian Empire and the Austro-Hungarian Empire that succeeded it.
He was born in what is today Croatia, however. If that's what is meant. -- Director (talk)

Number of Serbs

The number of sarbs in Macedonia,Albania and Germany is not correct,because they do not reflect the results of official censuses. http://www.instat.gov.al/media/177354/main_results__population_and_housing_census_2011.pdf https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/Thematisch/Bevoelkerung/MigrationIntegration/AuslaendBevoelkerung2010200117004.pdf?__blob=publicationFile http://www.stat.gov.mk/Publikacii/Mak_Brojki_2012_A.pdf Also The total population does not match with the e sum of the referenced populationsbelow in the infobox. I wonder if more reliable and actual official census data can be provided in order to reach a more realistic estimate on the number of Serbs. As it currently stands the article claims 10-12 million. Aside form their numbers in Serbia as per the 2011 census, the remaining data is questionable. even so the numbers in the table barely add up to 10 million. Where does the 12 million come from? This source only reports a total of 9.2 mil Serbs [3]. For Germany, which here the number is given as 700,000, official German data reports a bit over 200,000 [4]. The data presented here should reflect that.184.160.70.78 (talk) 17:28, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

The number of Serbs in Germany is certainly not 700,000. I think that according to census, Serbs seventh-largest ethnic group. We already discuss [5], [6] a lot about the number of Serbs, because the numbers are too large.--Sokac121 (talk) 11:03, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

OK. I am going to fix the number of the Serbs per reliable sources: Ethnologue and UCLA and to remove used now as biased, i.e Krajnaforce, Lopusinacom, Serbianunity etc. POV-articles. Jingiby (talk) 11:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Aaand Shokac comes to aid, all do the serbophobic paradee, yay :) ... listen guys, under 1.) in former SFRY there were aprox. 9-9,5 million Serbs (8,5 million declared as Serb and another 1 million as Yugoslavs) and even back then Serbian disapora was huge, under 2.) Ministry of Serbian Diaspora puts figures for Serbian Diaspora on up to 3,5 million. 3.) You removed all good sources and inputted Ethnologue source, which is a source for native speakers of Serbian language (and has some really funny numbers according to realistic census figures) and doesnt talk about Serbs as an ethnic group, the sources you removed were talking about Serbs and people of Serbian ancestry around the world. 4.) As million times explained and discussed, Germany DID NOT hold any census for ethnic declaring option, only citizenship.. the source which says 200,000 - is info on how many people with Serbian passport live in Germany and that number varies each year because of people who only temp. go to live in germany and return - it has nothing to do with how many Serbs as an ethnic group live in Germany. 5.) Number of Serbs is too big for Shokac because he is a Croatian anti-Serb nationalist (and his edit history reveals his goals on wikipedia and makes a proof, that all he ever did was decrease numbe rof Serbs months and months ago crying about "unreliable sources" eventough he was outnumbered 5 to 1 in discussions while on the other hand he was increasing number of Croats on "Croats" article with trash sources to make it look Croats number almost as same as Serbs do (eventough official historical demographics teach us that Serbs number ca. 1x more than Croats in the land of SFRY, KSHS and times before that on the Balkans, the diaspora numbers are also similar) - but this is not important here. What is important is 6.) that you used Ethnologue and UCLA - both linguistical sources for number of Serbs in your calculations and removed sources that indicated how many ethnic Serb people live around the world and those estimates were clearly made by a concensus of editors that that number should be between 10 (as a minimum) and 12 million (as a maximum) ... UCLA is not near a "reliable source", it is just a language learning webpage with no authors.. Ethnologue puts a figur eod 300,000 speakers in Albania that dont exist.. and both of these are lignuistical sources. Any wikipedia viewer has his own free will to believe which number is more "realistic" for himself :) lol... 7.) Total number of Serbs or any other ethnic group can never be correctly summed, there is no source that goes beneath 10 million and rarely any source that goes over 12 million, that is why the calculations were fine. I will now return everything as it was. (Правичност (talk) 15:47, 9 February 2014 (UTC))
Serbian-speakers are from 9,2 Million per Ethnologue - Languages of the world, Serbian, up to 11 million per UCLA Center for World Languages - UCLA International Institute, Serbian. More, not all Serbian-speakers have Serbian identity, i.e. part of them are Montenegrins and Serbian Muslims. Conclusion: Ethnologue and UCLA give an overestinmated number. The real number of the ethnic Serbs is obviously below those numbers given by unbiased, reliable sources, as both above. Jingiby (talk) 16:18, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Please, provide reliable sources about the number of the Serbs. According to Ethnic Groups of Europe: An Encyclopedia, Ethnic Groups of the World, Jeffrey E. Cole, ABC-CLIO, 2011, ISBN 1598843036, pp. 333-334., that is obviously reliable source, the total number of the Serbs ca. 2002 was 9,7 Million people. However the number of the Serbs decreased in the last decade. Jingiby (talk) 17:41, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Why dont you use ethnologue and other linguistical sources for number of Bulgarians on that article? ... And the way you described connections between a certain ethnic group or people of such ancestry with languages is just redicilous, there are alot of people in diaspora who are Serbs or have Serbian ancestry but dont speak the language. For example... How many of ca. 18 million Italians/people of Italian descent from USA do you think actually speak Italian? The answer is below 1 million... your claims are contradictory, we cannot make such estimations based on language. And as you can see there exist many estimations around the net, this is why we made a estimation which includes the lowest and highest possible number.. 10-12 million is totally okay and i believe Ministry for Serbian diaspora makes more accurate figures and estimations, the number of Serbs decreased in balkans mainly because they fled the wars and bad economic situations, you can see on other hand number of Serbs increasing in diaspora, for example in Vienna there were about 100,000 Serbs about 10 years ago, today estimations go already up to 200,000, other censuses that are official in certain countries show growth for number of Serbian people. ca. 8 million Serbs live in Balkans and another 2,5 - 4 million outside it, nothing biased there. We can not make estimations on our own point of view as i said. The sources were already verified by majority of editors, they are not used without no reason, there were previous conversations over this already, you seem to be late on this.. this is why your tags make no sense, sorry. (Правичност (talk) 20:00, 9 February 2014 (UTC))
news six days old! Ministry for Diaspora has been misleading the public about the number of Serbs in the world. In the world, there is no more than 2,000 organizations of Serbs there is only few several hundred. Jingiby and Yugoslavs were also included in Serbs. Yugoslavs were not Serbs, but Правичност them is counted as Serbs. The sources are unreliable, not deceive users, that nothing cannot be change. --Sokac121 (talk) 20:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Wow Shokac did you just discover Mars? You presented a online news source on which writes a statement of one person and now what? He said few hundered are officially registered and so what..? I am not belonging to any of these organisations and i am still a Serb eventough i am not included in any of statistics. What is your point? Why are those numbers you just inputted "real numbers" by you? Does this source say those are real numbers? Or do ethnologue world languages project and UCLA online language learning project create statistics on how many Serbs exist and count every single Serb on planet? is that it ? .. Yugoslavs arent counted into Serbs, that is another lie, quite typicall of you Shokac... There are footnotes beneath the infobox which state how many Yugoslavs live in 3 countries (with largest populations). Eventough Yugoslavs are undoubtebly Serbs who declare as Yugoslavs because of their passion and nostalgy for the ex-Yugoslavia country or either of Serbian origin or mixed Serbo-Croate or Serbo-Muslim or any other marriages, it is simply just a way of self-identifying, it is not a nationality nor an ethnic group. You got sources in footnotes also confirming my statement here - Yugoslavs are undoubtebly of Serbian origin. I think you should question yourself whetter you have a problem with yourself, you seem to be obsessed with decreaisng number of Serbs on wikipedia, you were involved into this crap 6 months ago, 4 months ago, 2 months ago, and now again. Is this your life goal? Your health is okay? Seriously. Lighten up, you cannot decrease number of Serbs on planet on wikipedia using unreliable material or wrong material while on other hand increase number of Croats with similar material (unworthy material). (Правичност (talk) 23:33, 9 February 2014 (UTC))
I have made a clarification about the Montenegrins, who are incl. into the number of the Serbian-speakers highest estimate as per source - UCLA. By the way Правичност, the highest number of the Bulgarian-speakers per UCLA is 9 Mill. but the number given on that article is underestimated to 8 Mill. because the number of Bulgarians decreased in the last decade, also there are around 0.5 Mill. Pomaks in Turkey, who speak Bulgarian, but they do not identify themselves as Bulgarians. Check it. Regards. Jingiby (talk) 05:46, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Jinglby what you did on Bulgarians article is not important for this article, i saw and i however dont support new changes on Bulgarians article (some yes, but most not), because you simply cant use "online language learning websites" as a reliable source, nor any linguist source, because linguist sources dont do researches on ethnic groups, they make studies on languages and only languages. The minimum number pf Serbs you can count from current infobox is ~10 million, not including all countries of the world, not including those who declared as Yugoslavs, Montenegrins or something else (perhaps as Americans) or not inckluding those who didnt declare at all on censuses. First source says 10,5 million, the others mention numbers over 11 million and some over 12 million, it is quite realistic that a nation which used to count over 9 million people in Balkans produced a diaspora of over 3 million people if not over 4 mil. throughout whole of history, nobody can know exact numbers... you cant just write down some number includes Montenegrins if a source doesnt say so (in this case it was a verry bad source too) and use a linguist source for a minimal estimation. That is unnacceptable. Just leave it as it is for now, i recommend you also change those figures and sources on Bulgarians article, because such sources dont define numbers of ethnic groups. (Правичност (talk) 14:10, 10 February 2014 (UTC))
Правичност, stop biased edits. Use then Academic publication that is specialicised in European ethnic groups and their number as Ethnic Groups of Europe: An Encyclopedia, Ethnic Groups of the World, Jeffrey E. Cole, ABC-CLIO, 2011, ISBN 1598843036, pp. 333-334., that is obviously reliable source, which claims the Serbs ca. 2002 were 9,7 Million people and reduce their number to 9,2 Mill. as per decreased data from the last census in 2011. ABC-CLIO is a publisher of reference works for the study of history and social studies in academic, secondary school, and public library settings. Check that and do not use ridiculous POV-sites. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 14:58, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Jinglby i simply can not understand how can someone write down figures and make conclusions for certain statements on wikipedia like you (making selfy mathemathics, astronomical calculations and figuring out possibilities that a certain source could include (or could be connected to some data) that you yourself have "heard" somewhere or saw it on youtube for example. Thats just nonsence. What in the world does ethnologue source has to do with the source you ar epresenting here? Where and when did number of Serbs on planet reduce to 9,7 million and then to 9,2 million by what logic and theory and when did you saw those Serbs "go off this planet" ? :) I would love to hear this ... The soruce you are presenting about encylopedia is okay but it is just one source; there are 2 books (that Shokac removed) which included 11,5 and 12 million. You have no senseable arguments for your edits, thus i have no idea where did you pick up Montenegins... id say by your theory, that higher estimation higher because it may include some "others" ... but where does it say that, which source? Those are language learning pages you are presenting man! They contain no data about ethnic group Serbs. And by what logic you think decreasing 9,7 to 9,2 million is "logical" due to last census in Serbia? In 2002 census there were 6,2 million declared Serbs, on this census there are 6 million declared Serbs, another 100-200,000 Serb reffugees might not be counted in this census again, and you forgot 100,000 Serbs live in Kosovo. Bad arguments, verry bad. There are 4 good sources mentioning figures up to 12 million, 1 source mentioning 10,5 and i can find another couple of sources mentioning 10 million Serbs or more. The problem with you is you got only one source with figure 9,7 million and where can i even rad that statement on that link??? And on the other hand you are pushing a linguist source Ethnologue of 9,2 million which has nothing to do with ethnic group Serbs and that number is questionable, that would mean only 500,000 people are native to Serbian lang. in Diaspora. And if you would put 9,2 million that would mean Serbian diaspora only counts 1,2 million people - but that is only a figure of how many Serbs live in German speaking countries :D, where is the rest of the world. You are trying to massively decrease number of Serbs on this article (which would be verry good for editor Sokac121 who is used to do this one and same thing for last year, while he would want to make no. of Croats look larger) by using bad argumentation, un-construct sources and by making your own scientific calculations and guessing. This isnt a circus for eevry anti-serbian nationalist to come and raid this article every bit of time and i see Sokac keeps bringing newer and newer allies to fight on this article for his life goal. . . mad house... there are 8 million Serbs in Balkans and between 2 mil.+ and 4 mil.+ abroad, you can find this info anywhere, that means 10-12 million Serbs worldwide... and thats it.. dont need no linguistic third party sources for that. Enough said. (Правичност (talk) 20:48, 10 February 2014 (UTC))
Правичност, сheck Verifiability and Reliable sources. We must base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. If available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources. Other reliable sources include: university-level textbooks, books published by respected publishing houses, magazines, journals, mainstream newspapers. Your sources failed to corresponded to those criterias. They are not reliable. They have a poor reputation for checking the facts, they lack meaningful editorial oversight, and have an apparent conflict of interest. Thank you Jingiby (talk) 06:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
They failed? They arent reliable? Why? because you say so? That is just your own opinion, like i said you missed out several discussions over this before and now you come up with linguistical sources to use, that cannot simply go. And btw ethnologue must be verry university-leveled research institution to find 300,000 native Serbian speakers in Albania (299,000 more from reality) and 4,5 million Serbian speakers in Serbia (2 million less from reality) ... verry verry accurate and reliable. I am not going to allow this article fall into circus, unless supreme admin users decide to supprt clown sources and self-made calculations and estimations. (Правичност (talk) 20:25, 11 February 2014 (UTC))
Because all the reasons mentioned above. If you find sources more reliable then UCLA, Ethnologue and ABC-CLIO, then provide them here for discussion. If no, stop using biased Serbian private sites, and keep those numbers based on neutral references, that are available at the moment. Keep in mind, that data published on the sites of nationalistic organizations, as Serbian Unity Congress for example, you have used before, are extremely unreliable. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 06:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Because of what reasons? Again, they are nationalist because you say so? And who are you? Please get me some editor i can talk to on an intelligent level, i dont wanna waste time with you. You are using sources who talk about language, not ethnic groups, period! (Правичност (talk) 15:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC))

Jingiby has given reliable and neutral sources. Sources of Правичност the terrible colored are with nationalism and sensationalism.

This is ridiculous, 7.5 million Serbs in Serbia :) 5,988,150 (2011) Serbs living in Serbia --Sokac121 (talk) 21:49, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

So you are complaining about one statement that there are 200,000 Serbs in Australia, because the census says otherwise, but on other hand you used a source that mentions 1,2 million Croats in USA despite the census data that says 414,000. And you call your self "rigthfull contributor to wikipedia"?, ay Shokac :) ... And you said Stanko Nišić`s book is nationalist and POV.. ok tell me the segments of nationalism out of that book right here, reveal them .. :) ... oh that link you gave has changed, it mentions 12 million Serbian language speakers worldwide, true it is a linguistical source, but it as used only as a backup source for other sources. We are going through same and same discussion here Shokac, you are living in a fake world, the Croats dont count more than Serbs dear beloved Serb hater Shokac, you cannot change that, you may change it on wikipedia by your actions fighting whole year to reduce number of Serbs and increase number of Croats, but your life goal will remain only virtual, if you achieve it, let me remind you. And i already said enough about "reliable" sources of Jinglby.. they are reliable to you only because they show fewer numbers of Serbs (eventough they dont even show that, they make estimations on number of speakers of Serbian LANGUAGE) than other soruces do, you would aprove every soruce that mentions the minimumest possible number of Serbs and always contradict those that seem "too big for your own taste and stomach" and i dont need to demonstrate that, im sure other users are familiar with your anti-serbian article actions and your "life goal" on wikipedia. You should learn English first and then try to "contribute" to wikipedia. Making any discussions with you is and always was impossible, because all you can say in English or can even argument against the soruces are always the same words ("Serbian nationalist propaganda, Serbian POV, Greater-Serbian nationalist sources, Chetnik soruces etc.."). Eventough none of what you say and claim can be prooved or aprooved, because the complaints you make are simply redicilous and out of sense, only showing your clear frustration against anything Serbian that exists in this world. Regards (Правичност (talk) 22:08, 12 February 2014 (UTC))

Правичност please holds the topics of conversation. Enough is insulting, say something about the 7.5 million Serbs in Serbia.--Sokac121 (talk) 22:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Your constant attacks on this article is an insult, why are you wrapping around one source now.. 7,5 mil. is population of Serbia excluding Kosovo and Metohija after 2002, number of Serbs after 2011 census might be much higher since 200,000 refugees still werent counted in and up to 300,000 people stayed anonymous from declaring their ethnic identity, but this doesnt matter, the source/sources you are complaining about are used for a HIGHER ESTIMATION next to the minimum one, as discussed, argued with you one hundered billion times, but you still dont get it obviously, that almost every article uses lower and higher estimations about ethnic groups, because it isnt possible to base accurate figures. There are several soruces that say 12 million on net, and several sources that mention 10 million, next to that, that Ministry for foreign affairs of Serbia estimates no. of Serbs in Diaspora between 2 and 4 million, next to the fact that ca. 8 million Serbs live in ex-Yugoslavia countries.. all of these facts are enough and nothing more needs to be said. Im not going to repeat my self, already repeated my self several times, especially to you, you who dont get anything obviously. Let me remind you that; you are the reason, this article is being locked down, protected 3rd or 4th time already and the reason is same, you cant bare figures of Serbs, you want them lower, eventhough you cant even count them lower mathematically using those figures from few countries in infobox, you are arguing over same sources eventough youve been "beaten down" already 3 times in same discussions, when you held this article hostage. (Правичност (talk) 02:35, 13 February 2014 (UTC))
Three editors disagree on that section with the number of the Serbs pushed by Правичност: IP 184.160.70.78, Sokac and Jingiby. Правичност, you must accept the reality. You are the only who supports that number here. You did not provide any neutral sources supporting your opinion. Serbian sources have conflict of interests and have to be verified with other unbiased sources, but their verification failed totally. If you do not provide English, German, French etc. reliable sources for verification of your claims, I am going to remove the fantasy-numbers into the info-box. My proposal is as follows: to fix the number of the Serbs from 9.0 up to 9.5 Million. The lowest result of 9.0 Million is based on Ethnologue, which claims: Serbian-speakers were 6,620,000 in Serbia (2002 census) and population total all countries is 9,262,890.

And who has verified these sources, you yourself? Those numbers can not be 9-9,5 million, because 9-9,5 million is how many Serbs lived in former Yugoslavia only about 25 years ago (8,6 mil. delcared as Serbs, 0,5 million as Yugoslavs and 500k as Montenegrins (out of which 200,000 declared as Serbs in 2002 census) without counting a significant Serbian diaspora throughout the world, this diaspora later grew even more because of the 90s wars and economic collapses and is still growing due to continous emigration of people (for example every year ~21,000 ppl leave for Germany from Serbia alone). Ethnologue used to write there were 4,5 million Serbian speakers in Serbia and 300,000 in Albania just one year ago; they however changed that data last year, which means they needed 11 years to come up with data refreshing and looking back how 2002 census looked like in Serbia.. and they work and edit over 7,300 languages? Yea i doubt they check every single one and refresh them and count every single speaker on this planet for each language :) .... a questionable project indeed, even for languages - though we are speaking about an ETHNIC GROUP here, not a language. (Правичност (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

Please, look that Ethnologue data about the Serbian-speakers is with 400,000 higher then the data claculated about the number of the ethnic Serbs according to the 2002 Census - 6,212,838. That means the real number of the ethnic Serbs is lower then that of the Serbian-speakers. In Ethnologwe is also a remark: alternate names of the language - Montenegrin, i.e. the overestimated data is result of the included number of the Montenegrins. Keep in mind that many people in Montenegro in the last decade are simply starting to refuse to identify with the Serbian ethnic group. Per the last census in Montenegro held in 2011 there lived 278,865 Montenegrins. Also in Ethnologue is a notice: other comments Muslims, that means: there are Muslims by nationality in former Yugoslavia, who are counted as Serbian-speakers. Their number in former Yugoslavia is ca. 100,000.

Yes, yes i checked, pretty impressive... and you think it is bizzare that more people opted as Serbian language speakers, than as ethnic Serbs on census of Rep. of Serbia??? There is nothing fascinating here, you got this same case in every single country, check even your Bulgarian census for example.. it is normal that people who are/used to something else other than Serbs, assimilated through years and started to speak Serbian as their native language and also declare as so on censuses like that... In 2011 census aprox. 6,3 million ppl declared Serbian as their maternal language and 6 million as Serbs, however there are aprox. 350,000 people who havent declared their ethnicity, under which ethnic group are you going to count those? And there are cases which we cannot derrive perfectly, such as constant dispute with people in Serbia declaring as Montenegrins or people in Montenegro declaring as Montenegrins. Montenegrin identity is still a dispute, some consider it as a separate ethnic group (and is officialy recognized like that) but Montenegrin can also be a regional affirmation and many people declare like that becaus ethey are proud of where they came from, though they declare their maternal language as Serbian and would call themselves Serbs in private life... we cannot know that... Similar case is with people who declare as Yugoslavs, only in this case we for surely know that Yugoslavians (those whod eclare like that) arent an ethnic group, there are also other cases of such declaring in Serbia and many other countries, where people declare regionally or "nostalgically" or ethnoreligiously regarding of their true identity, but however do declare their maternal language the right way (or not) ... we cannot know that. There arent 100,000 Muslims in Serbia - even if Ethnologue maybe claims that, it is not true and majority of them DO NOT declare that they speak Serbian. There are ca. 145,000 Bosniaks in Serbia who majoribly declare Bosnian as their maternal language, those who declared as Muslims by ethnicity count something over 19,000 people and some of these declare their language is Serbian, some Bosnian and some something else. And dont forget we are only talking about Serbia and Serbian census here. You are talking about how number of Serbs decreased, but do you know how and where did it decrease and where did it increase? You arent aware that up to 500,000 people left Serbia in the 90s alone, hundereds of thousands to follow in the next decade. The negative nathality isnt the main problem for Serbia, there is vast emigration also... number of Serbs in diaspora however is increasing so there is no (- -) here or (+ +) to claim number of Serbs increased or decreased on our planet only according to census for rep. of Serbia .. there is always a (+ -) .. you dont know how many people of Serbian descent live abroad and if they can speak the langauge and cannot unlist them from Serbs if they dont speak Serbian, that is redicilous ... nobody also knows how many Serbs left Bosnia, Montenegro, Croatia and went into diaspora for example.. how are you going to get to thsoe figures? (Правичност (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

The highest number 9.5 Million is based on an scientific encyclopedia specialized on the ethnic groups in Europe called: "Ethnic Groups of Europe, An Encyclopedia, Ethnic Groups of the World", Jeffrey E. Cole, ABC-CLIO, 2011, ISBN 1598843036, pp. 333-334, where is mentioned as follows: According to 2002 Census in Serbia lived 6,212,838 Serbs. The book maintains that the total number of the Serbs outside Serbia is ca. 3.5 Million, i.e a simple calculation points to 9.7 Million Serbs living worldwide. However do not forget that according to the last Census from 2011, the number of the Serbs in Serbia decreased from 6,212,838 to 5,988,150. Because of that fact, I offer to reduce the highest number of the Serbs with ca. 200,000.

This is the only source which could be good from all of your sources, because it talks about Serbs and not Serbian language, however the way you proceed to it is not correct, you are already changing the source your way and making your self calculations. What does the source exaclty say is simply retaken from Ministry for foreign affairs of Rep. of Serbia which i already wrote about previously. Outside of Serbia in the diaspora, there are 3,5 million Serbs and out of these aprox. 1,5 million are citizens of Serbia (SRB, SCG, FRY). But this sentence only mentions Serbs outside Serbia. I know you as a Bulgarian dont understand that Serbs have 3 homelands, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro (also Croatia in the past), there are up to 2 million Serbs living in all ex-YU republics and they are alochtone in all of these states. That means 8 million Serbs + 3,5 million outside Serbia ... but where is also Bosnian Serb diaspora, Montenegrin Serb, Croatian Serb diaspora? There are really alot of Bosnian Serbs living in the diaspora right after those Serbs from Serbia. How many Serbs live outside Bosnia, Croatia, Montenegro? You see that info is missing and we cannot base total number of Serbs on this planet based only on Serbian citizens and their children or grandgrand children who live troughout Europe or overseas, that would be offensive to ignore other Serbs, especially Bosnian Serbs who really have a significant diaspora. I would like you to link me that text from this book, so i can see what it actually writes and where. (Правичност (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

Now about the reliability of proposed by me sources.
  • Ethnologue Languages of the World is a web-based publication that contains statistics for 7,105 languages and dialects in its 17th edition, released in 2013. It is a comprehensive reference work cataloging all of the world’s known living languages. Since 1951, the Ethnologue has been an active research project involving hundreds of linguists and other researchers around the world. It is widely regarded to be the most comprehensive source of information of its kind.

I have already commented Ethnologue and its questionable mistakes and calculations above, linguist sources dont count how many Serbs or people of Serbian descent live on this planet. (Правичност (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

  • ABC-CLIO is a publisher of reference works for the study of history and social studies in academic, secondary school, and public library settings. "Ethnic Groups of Europe: An Encyclopedia" provides detailed descriptions of more than 100 European ethnic and national groups. It is part of a five-volume series on ethnic groups around the world. Author of the article on the Serbs is Mladena Prelic PhD. She is member of the Serbian Academy of Science and the Arts (SANU) in Belgrade and works in the Institute of Ethnography there. Jingiby (talk) 06:48, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok this is a good source, but give me the link so i can enter the info please. (Правичност (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

I will make also some remarks on the sources used by Правичност.
  • The first one is Blic, a Serbian daily middle-market tabloid newspaper founded in 1996. The publication is from 2011 but it contradicts itself. There are mentioned 10.5 Million Serbs who are living worldwide and 4,0 Million of them outside Serbia. However there are cited 6.2 Millions Serbs living in Serbia in 2011, but that is incorrect. The 2011 Census counted under 6.0 Million Serbs in Serbia, i.e. the simple calculation makes not 10,5 but under 10 Million Serbs worldwide.

Blic is one of the most reliable news medias in Serbia. Eventough 10,5 - 0,2 = 10,3 and not below 10 ; ... You cant base total number of Serbs on earth simply by just taking away some people from Serbia figures, we would have to check figures of Serbs in each country of the world to do so. But that isnt possible, this is why estimations exist. (Правичност (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

  • The second one is a book called Hrvatska oluja i srpske seobe by Stanko Nišić. The book is published by Knjiga-komerc in Beograd in Serbian. The author is a pensioner and former high ranking officer from the Army's General Staff in Communist Yugoslavia. He has PhD in the area of the communist military education. The publisher is also not an specialized academic publishing house but a commercial one. This propaganda book is the only place where is mentioned the number of 12 Million Serbs worldwide.

That is underestimating of Serbian high-ranking officers, he is Dr. Stanko Nišić also and this is not the only place where 12 million figure is mentioned. (Правичност (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

  • The third source redirects to the official web site of the European Commission and the languages in EU, but there is nothing mentioned about Serbian language or Serbs.

The link mentioned 12 million Serbian speakers worldwide, the url has changed and must be found again, that is all. (Правичност (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

  • The fourth one is the personal site of Marko Lopušina, who is a Belgrade reporter of the newspaper Nedeljni telegraf and I didn't found anything on the number of the Serbs wordwide here.

He made many books about Serbs around the world and that source mentions 11,5 million Serbs, dont know how you missed it. (Правичност (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

  • The fifth source is the official website of the Serb nationalist organization Serbian Unity Congress, which is under construction and does not provide any data at the moment.

Weird how i can access it normally, it`s estimations are based on 2 different researches; one mentions 12,1 and the other over 12,4 million. This website has many good sponsors and co-op-workers and it is controlled by the state of Nebraska if you can search it more detailly. (Правичност (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

None of the mentioned above sources is neither reliable nor unbiased in the concrete case, with the only exception of the web site of the European Commission. However the provided link does not mention anything about the number of the Serbs. Conclusion: what a mess! Jingiby (talk) 11:59, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Just check this out [[7]] and check my replies above in separate sections. (Правичност (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

Правичност you are wrong. Check this link to Ethnic Groups of Europe: An Encyclopedia, p. 334. What is written here is: The total official estimated number of Serbs living outside of Serbia is 3.5 Million. That is not the number of Serbs living outside the Western Balkans, but outside Serbia. Calculated with the number of the 6,0 Million Serbs living in Serbia according to the 2011 census the, makes an result of total 9,5 Million Serbs worldwide. That is all. Jingiby (talk) 16:56, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

In the absence of arguments Правичност began to lie. Правичност uses as sources of website in which nowhere mentioned Serbs! Serbian Unity Congress mentions 7.5 million Serbs in Serbia, In Serbia, live only 5,9 million Serbs and it is a good source for you? Blic is one of the most reliable news medias in Serbia. Blic is a tabloid, tends to sensationalism and nationalism web portal is beautiful :P Правичност you lost connection with reality, you begin to resent us. [8] This is deviously what did you do, answers after Jingiby, not in his message. --Sokac121 (talk) 21:01, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Shokac, soon lies will be removed from the "Croats" article. In Serbia there are almost 6 million serbs, not 5,9 million. Everything Serbian is nationalist to you, because you are a frustrated Serb hater (your wiki history explains this). And the way i was answering jinglby is easier for him to read, not for you.
Jinglby that is exactly my point, the text mentions only Serbs living outside of Serbia and they number 3,5 million and these figures were obviously taken from Ministry of foreign affairs of rep. of Serbia; http://www.mfa.gov.rs/en/consular-affairs/diaspora/diaspora-general-information ... Concetrate on this text:
According to the latest information provided by the diplomatic and consular missions of the Republic of Serbia abroad, even though the census of the entire Serbian diaspora has never been attempted, it is estimated that overall, Serbia has a diaspora of 3.5 million people. Of this number, about a million and a half are citizens of Serbia, a considerable number of them having dual citizenship, meaning that they also have the citizenship of their country of immigration
1,5 million out of 3,5 million Serbs in DIASPORA have Serbian citizenship and a considerable number of these have dual citizenships (also from the state to which they emigrated) from Serbia. These datas do not mention Serbs in region, who number near to 2 million and they do not mention how many Serbs live outside Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro etc... they arent taling about those citizens.. it clearly says Serbia has a diaspora of 3,5 million people in the link i gave you, in the link you gave me it starts mentioning Western europe and overseas countries and in the end the author concludes there are 3,5 million Serbs living outside of Serbia; again nobody mentioning Serbs from Bosnia and Montenegro and perhaps Croatia.. Serbs in region arent diaspora and they arent counted into that number, neither is Bosnian Serb diaspora counted into that number or even if it would be, Serbs from region arent counted and that is verry important, because Serbs are a constituent nation in BiH, they also were in Montenegro not far ago and in Croatia until the end of the war. The link you provided also mentions 1,26 million Serbs living in Republika Srpska and 150,000 in Kosovo, these figures and other countries from region were mentioned in context with Serbia. After that it mentioned Serbs living also abroad and thus followed the estimation of Serbs living outside of Serbia. This is also an interesting reliable source - and it mentions same stuff as many other sources do, when it comes to diaspora - it says serbian diaspora counts 3 - 4 million people and starts giving examples on individual foreign countries http://www.b92.net/biz/vesti/srbija.php?yyyy=2012&mm=04&dd=30&nav_id=605046 . (Правичност (talk) 22:02, 13 February 2014 (UTC))
your source again unreliable Ministry of Foreign Affairs new source news six days old! Ministry for Diaspora has been misleading the public about the number of Serbs in the world. In the world, there is no more than 2,000 organizations of Serbs there is only few several hundred:P --Sokac121 (talk) 23:26, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Dont cry Šokčino, just moments ago you protested that Blic is unreliable source and now you are using it to help your arguments? That is funny... anyways that source is nothing more but just an interview and opinion of a single man and it doesnt state any changes to any estimations or figures, neither did Ministry change any of the estimations, neither did he. Organizations dont count many people, its completely volunteeraly ..

The interview is gave Aleksandar Vlajković from the Ministry of Diaspora, is not important website--Sokac121 (talk) 11:12, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

This guy isnt more reliable from what Ministry estimates and again the source which Jinglby presented has OBVIOUS connections with Minsitry for foreign affairs of Rep. of Serbia estimations about number of Serbs in diaspora. They didnt pick up that same exact number somewhere by themselves, they needed sources, they found them by looking up info on censuses and from those who really take care about Serbian diaspora (the Ministry ofc.). How else do you think encyclopedias get written? Certainly not the same way as you are overincreasing number of Croats by looking up and using clown-circus sources like you are doing on Croats article ;). (Правичност (talk) 03:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC))

Правичност, you obviously keep fantasizing. We never reach consensus in this way.Jingiby (talk) 06:48, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
I have moved the discussion to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. You are welcome there. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 07:07, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
You must think im really naive to discuss this with you two - a Bulgarian nationalist who tries to insert language sources as reliable sources for counting an ethnic group and who is ofcourse supported by a known characther here - an Anti Serbian Croatian nationalist - Sokac121 who holds more than one accounts (under different IP names and maybe some other) to keep this article in constant dispute and flame over same sources and same theme in the last 7 months; his constant edit warring on figures of Serbs in infobox resulted in this article being locked and protected 4 times, over same theme and same sources, which by now havent changed (Because for example one cannot claim 4 times that German census shows 200,000 Serbs in Germany, if multiple editors already explained 4 times to him, that number doesnt show number of ethnic Serbs, but number of people who hold citizenship of rep. of Serbia, because Germany didnt hold a census on which people could ethnically or religiously or linguistically declare) - if you explain this to one user 4 times and he calms down for 1,3,5 months and comes back with same arguments again, you cannot take him seriously. He claims Serbs barely add up to 10 million in infobox and estimation 10-12 million is biased (which is not true because 10 million is exactly how much you get from counting those figures from infobox out of which only countries who have over 5,000 serb population are included in that infobox). On the other hand he is (as double standards he always has) fearsomley protecting the Croats article, which says Croat total population is 7,5 - 8,5 million ... eventough figures in infobox barely add up to even 6,4 million; after that Sokac used unnoficial sources for USA and New Zealand and Chile and what other to increase that figure up to 7,4 million - which means even with ultra "pumped up" figures presented with circus sources, this number doesnt meet their nationalist figures. What im trying to say is, he is fighting on this article for almost one year over same problem, keeping it hostage, crying about unrelaible numbers and sources while he is defending totally unreliable and unoffical sources on another article (because he is a Croatian nationalist). This is why i refuse to step into any further discussion with this user, because i cant believe he never got even warned for what he did and how many times he falsely accused me and even reported me for nothing, that ofcourse met no success, even when Jinglby tried, because like i said, your arguments are weak and you can try whatever you want against me, you wont tear me down, because i have personality, wide open view and common sense, unlike nationalist users who only concentrate on vandalizing and accusing. I wont make further discussions until some other users who are either neutral or either Serbian join this discussion, because once again- i dont aproove and recognize your actions as a contribution to wikipedia, i only see internet nationalism and internet vandalism in those actions. (Правичност (talk) 14:08, 15 February 2014 (UTC))


I am just here to comment the latest change and source presented by editor "NeronBG".. http://rs.one.un.org/organizations/12/Serbian%20Diaspora%20and%20Youth,%20June%202011.pdf ...

The source (University of Kent at Brussels) is clearly reliable, subject is Serbian Diaspora, everything written is based on studies, as that is what universities do. It cleary says what i have mentioned my self here before:

Serbia (6 mil. Serbs) (+ ~140,000 in Kosovo) has about 2,2 million emigrants living abroad (in the Serbian Diaspora (USA, GER, AUT etc...))- estimates also go up to 3,8 million. While Ministry of Serbian Diaspora puts highest estimates even up to 4,2 million, basing these figures on a definition of what Serbian Diaspora actually is (from 2008) - We have clear figures about Serbs from Serbia + emigrants from Serbia ... summing these, we would get 8,3 million people at a MINIMUM number, without counting 2 million Serbs living in the region where they are autochtoneus nation (BiH, MNE, CRO, MAK, ROM, and HUN) and without counting how many Serbs from region live abroad in Diaspora. At a minimum estimate we easily get over 10 million people, using mid estimates from the source (up to 3,5 million) or highest estimate (up to 4,2 mil.) about Serbian Diaspora from the source, we would get up to 12 million people or over. This is why an estimation of 10-12 million Serbs total population in world (as majority of other sources also estimated on this article) is a completely legitimate estimate. (Правичност (talk) 03:38, 17 March 2014 (UTC))

Are you blind? [9]--Šokac121 ℗ 14:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Verry weak argument. Overruled. (Правичност (talk) 23:55, 17 March 2014 (UTC))

Genes

KS, so far you just presented a blog and forum. iGenea is a for profit business revolving around selling personal genome test kits much like 23andMe. There is nothing indicating that it's peer reviewed or scholarly let alone the "most valid". --◅ PRODUCER (TALK) 19:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Forums can not be used as sources on Wikipedia. Genetic studies point at lower level of I2a among Serbs ca. 30%. Check for example: Gene. 2012 Jan 31. High levels of Paleolithic Y-chromosome lineages characterize Serbia. Regueiro M, Rivera L, Damnjanovic T, Lukovic L, Milasin J, Herrera RJ. Jingiby (talk) 19:19, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Serbs from Serbia. Who are, worldwide, the minority of Serbs. Critikal1 (talk) 19:36, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

vandalism

User:Lackope vandalize articles about Serbs, for example not respected source on total number Serbs in the world. Removes the official census, example is Slovenia.--ChumleeS (talk) 11:45, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 January 2015

Considering Genetics

E1b1b1a2-V13, 20.35% and 19.80%. The frequency of this haplogroup peaks in Albania (24%), and is also high among Greeks, Romanians, Macedonian Slavs, Bulgarians, and southern Italians.[39][40]

One has to consider that the study included Kosovo, which is populated by ethnic Albanians who are the main carriers of this haplogroup and not Serbs per se, meaning that the percentage of this gene in ethnic Serbs is considerably lower if this is taken into account.

For up-to-date data on this subject one may take the information from the Serbian DNA Project http://poreklo.rs/srpski-dnk-projekat/

178.190.68.251 (talk) 20:14, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 23:41, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

These are the results of roughly 600 subjects currently tested amongst the Serbian population, conducted by the [| Serbian DNA Project]. The results are a subject of change with the increase of the tested individuals.

I2a1b (branch) _ 32,48%

  • I2a1b1 DIN-S _ 20,85%
  • I2a1b1 DIN-N _ 6,5%
  • I2a1b Dinaric _ 5,13%

R1a _ 21,71%
E1b1b1а1b-V13 _ 14,53%
I1 _ 7,52%
J2b _ 7,86%
G2 _ 4,44%
R1b _ 3,93%

The exploration spectrum is wider than the one conducted by Marijana Pericic and her associates, which involved 681 test subjects spread over 7 different ethnicities, thus in my opinion the genetic results could be considered obsolete and changed with the ones stated above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.191.61.51 (talk) 15:51, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Number of Serbs in diaspora countries

The infobox should include estimated number of ethnic Serbs in diaspora countries, and not immigrants from Serbia. The estimated number of Serbs living in Germany is 700,000, while the number of Serbian nationals in 2013 was 241,374 (which includes Kosovo Albanians, among other ethnic groups). See Serbian diaspora.--Zoupan 15:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

There is only one thing to do, and that is to move the data in the infobox to the table at Serbian diaspora.--Zoupan 22:21, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Serbs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:39, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Source needed

″Later, Serbs created numerous small states located in Bosnia and Herzegovina″According to who? Where is the source?Tarmet (talk) 18:06, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Genetic studies

Data from genetic studies, found at Genetic studies on Serbs, should not be presented in its entirety here. Apart from taking up space, breaking harmony, the data from few Y-DNA tests is given undue weight and goes against primary sources guidelines. Furthermore, one needs to understand that Haplogroups are complex, and should not be used for POV. I want to note this in case of future disruptive editing.--Zoupan 02:19, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

I agree with that, it's a too specialized field of study for such a general article. - Anonimski (talk) 08:11, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

The number of serbs in Kosovo

I think that 140,000 serbs estimate is incredible as the OFFCIAL 2011 KOSOVO POPULATION CENSUS SAYS THERE ARE 25,532 SERBS IN KOSOVO.I know some serbs boycotted the process but this does not mean that we have to put the number at 140,000.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Suksesi (talk • contribs)

User:Suksesi claimed "Please do not use estimations while there are official numbers", when in fact, Minority figures in Kosovo census to be used with reservations: "It is the failure of northern Kosovo’s participation and the partial boycott by Serb and Roma communities in southern Kosovo that jeopardizes the validity of the census results.". I will have to report User:Suksesi next time.--Zoupan 17:43, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

You are right when you say the 25,532 number is not correct but this does not mean that the real number is 100,000 or 140,000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suksesi (talk • contribs) 17:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Why are you so ignorant? It is meant to show a realistic number, don't you think? That's what estimations are for (look up the word, estimation).--Zoupan 18:25, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Some RESOURCED estimations put the number at around 40,000-50,000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suksesi (talk • contribs) 18:50, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I doubt it. You claimed 5 million Albanians in Turkey. Why insist on reducing the number of Serbs? Wait, that was a dumb question.--Zoupan 18:58, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I have used a source for 5 mln albanians in Turkey .Why do not you use a source for your 100000 serbs in kosovo?Wait, that was a dumb question and you do not know the answer. Suksesi (talk) 10:27, 22 February 2015 (UTC)User_talk:Suksesi

vandalism on articles

Information icon Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to multiple articles referring to Serb minorities without any appropriate unbiased references. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. Please refrain from un-constructive edits as they reduce the credibility of articles on Wikipedia. Please keep an open mind and subdue objective opinions. Thank You Do, Sdo... Ketu per gjithmon ! (talk) 23:17, 4 March 2015 (UTC) this is a customized user warning template by a banned user --Zoupan 20:49, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Ethnonym

The origin of their ethnonym is unclear (see Names of the Serbs and Serbia). — isn't this as clear as it gets? There is no need for forking the theories found in that article to this one. --Zoupan 21:29, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Serbs/Archive_9&oldid=1137180730"