![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This should be split into two articles. serbia and Montenegro are two separate countries now and there should be separate article about Bosniak population in both of them. PANONIAN (talk) 01:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
I suggest joining Bosniaks of Montenegro to this articel. It seems logic, as that people belongs to one not only nation, but of the same sub-ethnic origin. -- Edin Sijercic 21:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Image:Grbsandzaka.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 01:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
The artice shows Basque as a language spoken by Bosniaks... I doubt that is true. Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Viperov ( talk • contribs) 12:45, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
While it did improve the article in some aspects it also inexplicably removed valid content in the form of two maps. One showing the demographic breakdown of the Sandzak region (thus including Serbia) and one describing the historic ties between Sandzak and Ottoman Bosnia (no different than showing a map of Caslav Klonimir's Serbian 10th century realm in the Bosnian Serbs article). I suspect this might have been a POV attempt to underestimate these historic aspects and so I disapprove of this part of Klacko's "rearrangement". 90.230.57.190 ( talk) 23:14, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Demographic map is not adequate and relevant for this article. Firstly, this is not article about Sandžak, but about Bosniaks in Serbia. Although it may overlap in some aspects, contents of these two articles are essentially different since article about Bosniaks in Serbia does not need to include Bosniaks in Montenegro. Secondly, map is somewhat pretentious since it shows some semi-borders where they don't exist (borders of non-existant Sandžak region, in sense of a administartive unit/region); not to mention still questionable Kosovo borders with Serbia. Last but not the least, I am not against demographic map per se, but it should be the one which concerns Bosniaks in Serbia in particular (e.g. demographic map of Serbian part of Sandžak), not Bosniaks in Montenegro or Bosniaks in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Historic map, showing Bosnian elayet, is also somewhat problematic since it does have some dubious claims. Nevertheles, I am ok with that map being part of the article, as long as footnote is corrected as it is misleading since Bosnian elayet is in no way continuation of medieval Bosnian kingdom, at least there should be some credible refference confirming that claim. Until then, footnote in such form is going to be modified.
Regards, Klačko ( talk) 15:41, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
If nobody objects, I'll remove Sulejman Pačariz from the infobox, and few others in order to sort out the infobox images of well known Bosniaks in Serbia. The reason for this is that Pačariz was a Nazi collaborator who was responsible for various killings, therefore he's not a famous Bosniak, but rather infamous. His image in the infobox can only have a political agenda as a result, as there's no good reason for including him as a prominent Bosniak. My point is not to accuse anyone of promoting a certain political agenda, as this was probably unintended.
There are currently 12 images, so in order to sort them out, I'll remove three images. Along with Pažariz, I'll remove Téa Obreht, as her ethnicity is unclear (she's half Muslim half Slovene who obtained US citizenship) and Amela Terzić, as she has the least page views. -- AnulBanul ( talk) 12:52, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
I made an edit to this page that referenced a study about ethic Albanians identifying themselves as Bosniaks on the census. Article text stayed "sociopolitical discrimination after World War Two. Article stated self-reported discrimination following breakup of Yugoslavia, not in the period following WWII and the Yugoslav Civil Wars. That change was made. Canlawtictoc ( talk) 23:27, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This should be split into two articles. serbia and Montenegro are two separate countries now and there should be separate article about Bosniak population in both of them. PANONIAN (talk) 01:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
I suggest joining Bosniaks of Montenegro to this articel. It seems logic, as that people belongs to one not only nation, but of the same sub-ethnic origin. -- Edin Sijercic 21:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Image:Grbsandzaka.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 01:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
The artice shows Basque as a language spoken by Bosniaks... I doubt that is true. Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Viperov ( talk • contribs) 12:45, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
While it did improve the article in some aspects it also inexplicably removed valid content in the form of two maps. One showing the demographic breakdown of the Sandzak region (thus including Serbia) and one describing the historic ties between Sandzak and Ottoman Bosnia (no different than showing a map of Caslav Klonimir's Serbian 10th century realm in the Bosnian Serbs article). I suspect this might have been a POV attempt to underestimate these historic aspects and so I disapprove of this part of Klacko's "rearrangement". 90.230.57.190 ( talk) 23:14, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Demographic map is not adequate and relevant for this article. Firstly, this is not article about Sandžak, but about Bosniaks in Serbia. Although it may overlap in some aspects, contents of these two articles are essentially different since article about Bosniaks in Serbia does not need to include Bosniaks in Montenegro. Secondly, map is somewhat pretentious since it shows some semi-borders where they don't exist (borders of non-existant Sandžak region, in sense of a administartive unit/region); not to mention still questionable Kosovo borders with Serbia. Last but not the least, I am not against demographic map per se, but it should be the one which concerns Bosniaks in Serbia in particular (e.g. demographic map of Serbian part of Sandžak), not Bosniaks in Montenegro or Bosniaks in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Historic map, showing Bosnian elayet, is also somewhat problematic since it does have some dubious claims. Nevertheles, I am ok with that map being part of the article, as long as footnote is corrected as it is misleading since Bosnian elayet is in no way continuation of medieval Bosnian kingdom, at least there should be some credible refference confirming that claim. Until then, footnote in such form is going to be modified.
Regards, Klačko ( talk) 15:41, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
If nobody objects, I'll remove Sulejman Pačariz from the infobox, and few others in order to sort out the infobox images of well known Bosniaks in Serbia. The reason for this is that Pačariz was a Nazi collaborator who was responsible for various killings, therefore he's not a famous Bosniak, but rather infamous. His image in the infobox can only have a political agenda as a result, as there's no good reason for including him as a prominent Bosniak. My point is not to accuse anyone of promoting a certain political agenda, as this was probably unintended.
There are currently 12 images, so in order to sort them out, I'll remove three images. Along with Pažariz, I'll remove Téa Obreht, as her ethnicity is unclear (she's half Muslim half Slovene who obtained US citizenship) and Amela Terzić, as she has the least page views. -- AnulBanul ( talk) 12:52, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
I made an edit to this page that referenced a study about ethic Albanians identifying themselves as Bosniaks on the census. Article text stayed "sociopolitical discrimination after World War Two. Article stated self-reported discrimination following breakup of Yugoslavia, not in the period following WWII and the Yugoslav Civil Wars. That change was made. Canlawtictoc ( talk) 23:27, 14 November 2019 (UTC)