7,864
edits
Changes
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Sunday May 05, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to searchDirectory:Josip Broz Tito and Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 06:10, 21 November 2011
, 06:10, 21 November 2011→Biased Usage of Wikipedia
{{Cquote|''Sorry but your #1 (non-local) is the definition of WP:BIAS (speaking of locals - Dizdar is quoted in the article - I've actually downloaded his paper and what he says doesn't resemble what his research is being used to support here), and your #4 is very debatable since everyone (and by "everyone" I mean scholars both in the region and abroad, the general public, history textbooks, popular media and the like) consider Tito to be synonymous with Yugoslavia, the country where he was the ultimate authority on all matters, including being the country's prime minister, president, defence minister and/or commander-in-chief. When they talk about Yugoslavia's accomplishments they call them "Tito's accomplishments" and when they talk about atrocities they talk about "Tito's atrocities". Insisting that reliable authors must provide proof of his direct involvement in something is in direct opposition with WP:OR. Tito is synonymous with the regime he led for better or worse just like Hitler is synonymous with Nazi Germany or Ante Pavelić with NDH or Nicolae Ceausescu with communist [[Romania]]. That's what Slovenian Constitutional Court's ruling said, that's what historians say and that's what the public thinks. The only difference is that his fans focus only on regime's good things and his critics on its bad things. But nobody opposes the idea that it was all him. But the issue remains that this article does not touch on any negative thing at all. So how is a reader going to make sense of the court ruling?''}}
{{Cquote|''Sorry but your #1 (non-local) is the definition of WP:BIAS (speaking of locals - Dizdar is quoted in the article - I've actually downloaded his paper and what he says doesn't resemble what his research is being used to support here), and your #4 is very debatable since everyone (and by "everyone" I mean scholars both in the region and abroad, the general public, history textbooks, popular media and the like) consider Tito to be synonymous with Yugoslavia, the country where he was the ultimate authority on all matters, including being the country's prime minister, president, defence minister and/or commander-in-chief. When they talk about Yugoslavia's accomplishments they call them "Tito's accomplishments" and when they talk about atrocities they talk about "Tito's atrocities". Insisting that reliable authors must provide proof of his direct involvement in something is in direct opposition with WP:OR. Tito is synonymous with the regime he led for better or worse just like Hitler is synonymous with Nazi Germany or Ante Pavelić with NDH or Nicolae Ceausescu with communist [[Romania]]. That's what Slovenian Constitutional Court's ruling said, that's what historians say and that's what the public thinks. The only difference is that his fans focus only on regime's good things and his critics on its bad things. But nobody opposes the idea that it was all him. But the issue remains that this article does not touch on any negative thing at all. So how is a reader going to make sense of the court ruling?''}}
Another felow Wikipedian Editor finds somethings just don't add up:
{{Cquote|''The problem is that DIREKTOR is seing his highly biased version that he defended by all means in all these articles being replaced by correct interpretations of sources, thus all the panic now. A way to demonstrate this highly biased aproach by him can be confirmed by his insistent way of describing the issue purpously as "obscure". After all we are dealing with a major resistance movement in the entire region, that, yes, did had its difficulties troughout the war. But DIREKTOR seems unable to separate his personal feelings here... and that is a BIG problem, joined by his highly manipulative and rude manner of discussing these sensitive issues. A clear disruption in my view, but unfortunatelly and amazingly, DIREKTOR has been forgiven allways because of some strange reasons...''}}
==== The Slovenia Times Article====
==== The Slovenia Times Article====
* ''Communist labour camps in Slovenia were established already in 1945. These were camps for forced labour and were called penal camps. In 1949, correctional camps and camps for socially beneficial labour called working groups were established. All these labour camps were abolished in the beginning of 1951, when new criminal legislation, free of the concept of forced, correctional and socially beneficial labour was adopted.'' (pages 145 & 146)}}
* ''Communist labour camps in Slovenia were established already in 1945. These were camps for forced labour and were called penal camps. In 1949, correctional camps and camps for socially beneficial labour called working groups were established. All these labour camps were abolished in the beginning of 1951, when new criminal legislation, free of the concept of forced, correctional and socially beneficial labour was adopted.'' (pages 145 & 146)}}
'''Press releases''' [http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/08/230&type=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en “Crimes Committed by Totalitarian Regime"- '''Link'''] concerning the European Public Hearing (Brussels, 8 April 2008)
'''Press releases''' [http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/08/230&type=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en “Crimes Committed by Totalitarian Regime"- '''Link'''] concerning the European Public Hearing (Brussels, 8 April 2008)
== Government of the Slovenia ==
== Government of the Slovenia ==
The government of the [[Slovenia|Republic of Slovenia]] (a former republic of Yugoslavia) has commission a study of communist crimes in the immediate post [[World War Two]] period. It was called ''Commission on Concealed Mass Graves in Slovenia''. Their work was completed in October 2009. Below is a Croatian Newspaper ''Jutarnji'' report on the matter:<ref>[http://www.jutarnji.hr/u-581-grobnici-je-100-000-zrtava/310887/ www.jutarnji.hr] U 581 Grobnici je 100.000 žrtava. [http://translate.google.com.au/translate?hl=en&sl=hr&u=http://www.jutarnji.hr/u-581-grobnici-je-100-000-zrtava/310887/&ei=8x3BS-n7MYH-6QP17L3CCQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAcQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.jutarnji.hr/u-581-grobnici-je-100-000-zrtava/310887/%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den-us English version:] The Jutarnji newspaper reported on the 01/10/2009 commissions find, in all it is estimated that there are 100 000 victims in 581 mass graves</ref>
The government of the [[Slovenia|Republic of Slovenia]] (a former republic of Yugoslavia) has commission a study of communist crimes in the immediate post [[World War Two]] period. It was called ''Commission on Concealed Mass Graves in Slovenia''. Their work was completed in October 2009. Below is a Croatian Newspaper ''Jutarnji'' report on the matter:<ref>[http://www.jutarnji.hr/u-581-grobnici-je-100-000-zrtava/310887/ www.jutarnji.hr] U 581 Grobnici je 100.000 žrtava. [http://translate.google.com.au/translate?hl=en&sl=hr&u=http://www.jutarnji.hr/u-581-grobnici-je-100-000-zrtava/310887/&ei=8x3BS-n7MYH-6QP17L3CCQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAcQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.jutarnji.hr/u-581-grobnici-je-100-000-zrtava/310887/%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den-us English version:] The Jutarnji newspaper reported on the 01/10/2009 commissions find, in all it is estimated that there are 100 000 victims in 581 mass graves</ref>
