# Talk:1918 protest in Zagreb

This article has the statement "shouting "Long live the republic!", "Long live Radić!", "Down with King Peter!", "Down with the dynasty!", "Long live the peasant party!", "Down with militarism!", "Long live Croatian republic!", and "Long live Bolshevik republic!". 
This is NOT the proper translation of what is said in old sources. 
I improved the section with "and shouting "Dolje srpska dinastija! Dolje kralj Petar! Dolje srpski militarizam!" ("Down with the Serbian dynasty ! Down with King Peter! Down with Serbian militarism!". They also shouted their desire for a free Croatia, and a long life for Stjepan Radić and the Croatian republic."  
With the reference to Horvat, Rudolf (1942). Hrvatska na mučilištu (Croatia in the torture chamber) (in Croatian) (First ed.). Zagreb: Kulturno-Historijsko Društvo "Hrvatski Rodoljub". p. 53.
User "Buidhe" has decided to undo the improvement.
Why would an improvement that is properly referenced be undone?
If "fake history" is preferred here then where is the credibility in the article the authors and other "revisers"? ZidarZ (talk) 19:00, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I am having a significant problem with user "Duidhe".
He has yet again udone my additions.
His last reason for undoing my additions was "A book literally titled "Croatia in the torture chamber" is not an indication of WP:RS"
Does this mean that "Duidhe" judges the validity of books based on their title?  According to him the book "Hrvatska na mučilištu" by Rudolf Horvat, is not a valid reference for his liking.  By this,  "Duidhe" says that Rudolf Horvat is not a legitimate historian.
He educated me on "contentious topics".
As in a dance, two people are required for something to be "contentious".
If anyone is making this contentious it is "Duidhe" who undoes true facts to paint a false picture of events - a picture that has an anti-Croat vibe.
Unfortunately I have no idea about how to report the bullying that I am experiencing with this person. ZidarZ (talk) 22:07, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
I'm not the one who decided it's a contentious topic,  the WP:ARBCOM did that.
Although biased sources are allowed in some cases, books with hyperbolic titles are less likely to be WP:RS and suitable to cite for wikipedia purposes.
You're welcome to go to WP:NPOVN, WP:DR, WP:ANI, or WP:AE if you like. (t · c) buidhe 22:44, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
You truly do not say much of relevance.  You seem to throw out letters in the hope of confusing the other person and thus hoping to seem competent.  You are failing in that because you do not provide any direct answers.  The only thing that makes sense is that you have a personal bias and it is from that bias that you act.
Where does it say that the book "Hrvatska na mučilištu" by Rudolf Horvat has a "hyperbolic title"?  You judge the title of a book written 80 yeas ago during a difficult time in Croatian history?
hyperbole : extravagant exaggeration
Do you understand the Croatian language?
If not, then what right do you have to judge me/us?
Who are you to judge that the title is an "extravagant exaggeration"?  If you think that Croatians did not feel like they were living in a "mučilištu" (torture chamber), maybe that is evidence of your bias.
Maybe I made an error in my translation of "mučilište", which has a colourful connection to "torture chamber" but a technically more accurate title is "place of agony/anguish/suffering"
So, if I translated the title to "Croatia in a place of agony", would it be less of a "hyperbolic title"?
BTW - after a quick search, the book that you are "burning" is not "banned" on Wikipedia. Do we need "book burners" on wikipedia?  - yes hyperbole. ZidarZ (talk) 23:09, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

There are questions about why the "protest" happened.  
The root cause is the formation of the Kingdom of SHS.  The critical aspect is whether or not the formation of the kingdom was legitimate.  If the kingdom was formed not by a democratic process but by internal special interest groups and manipulation by foreign powers, was the formation of the kingdom legitimate?  If it was not legitimate, then we can ask if the people, the wronged parties, were justified in protesting?  
At present, the "vibe" on this article and the Kingdom of SHS article seems to be that the formation was legitimate and therefore the Croatian people are presented as the "bad guys".  
I wonder how much of a role Ilija Garašanin and the Načertanije played and if that can help us determine who the victims and victimizers were. ZidarZ (talk) 01:43, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I am confused. 
In Croatian, the event is known as "Prosinačke žrtve 5. prosinca 1918." which translated to "December Sacrifices/Victims of December 5, 1918". In Serbian, the event is known as "decembarske žrtve" also December Victims, as it is also in Slovenia.
Why is the English title "1918 protest in Zagreb"? 
There is a big difference between the Croatian and English titles.  To me, it seems like an attempt at the minimization of the suffering of the Croatian people. The only place online that the event is called "1918 protest in Zagreb" is on Wikipedia. ZidarZ (talk) 12:53, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Is it necessary to state the exact same date twice in a single sentence? 148.3.55.113 (talk) 08:53, 5 December 2024 (UTC)