Talk:Vrlika

message: Lets talk about this page. Don't be coming along and deleting all of my work every day! Kukar 21:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe I am simple person which do not understand your changes but for me your only edit in this article is deleting everything connected with Croats and Croatia. Because of that we are having nothing to talk (you are POV editor), and I have not noticed that you have talked before your changes. ---Rjecina 21:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Start Discussion

message: I'm cool that the Serbian cyrillic spelling of Vrlika stays non-bold. Agree!
Why do you erase the "Serbian Church Sv Nikola" from the picture sub-title? Thats why the pic is there? Kukar 21:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Agree, Yet Disagree

message: So what are you tired of. Lets look at the settlement of the Vrlika region, Sv Spas history and the Serbian people of the Vrlika region in more detail. We can even have the 2 views represented on the page. This is going to take alot more research and an understanding between you and I than just quoting what the "Offical" Vrlika webpage says or even worse leaving it unquoted. I dont think we want to get into WWII and talk of massacres and bombardments just yet. What I would like to do is have an objective site on Vrlika. Kukar 23:47, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What are you tired of

message: I think that by putting something on the "Grobari" is something that is imporatant to the people of Vrlika and an example of not just the tolerence that Serbs and Croats exibited in the Vrlicka Krajina but also how both peoples lived, worked and even celebrated and respected each others differences especially religion. This is very important! Kukar 23:47, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Grobari

message: We need to discuss the history section. It is unaceptable, and also annoying, that we change it every day from Croat to South-Slav. I suggest that we put South Slav until we find a common understanding built on historical proofs and analysis.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kukar (talk • contribs) 23:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why I am tired ?? Because of your thinking which is not confirmed with facts that in Vrlika region has not come Croats. In this article (and you agree with that) it is clearly writen that closest cities are Sinj, Knin and Drniš. On web page of Knin  you will find that this city has been 1 of Croatian capitals in 9 century. Please tell me how is this possible if Croats do not live there, and how is possible that there are Serbian and not Croats graves from that period. Because you do not accept this historical facts I believe that you are bad faith editor. My arguments are supported but Croatian academic community, offical web page of Vrlika and offical web page of Knin. On other side I have been never reading of Serbs in that region before your edits .. For me this discussion is closed. --Rjecina 00:28, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lets discuss the history section

message: Well I guess if you don't want to discuss this I will just have to prove my point and come to an "un-biased" conclusion and support my conclusions with strong sources and historical proofs. I do consider the Croats as part of the south slav people and I do not see a problem with putting that until we determine who the first people to settle Vrlika "really" were. Maybe we are arguing over something very insignificant as it will be impossible to find out who really settled there first. I suggest that you become more receptive to having a discussion rather then closing the discussion. We are all friends here. Kukar 01:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the end I must say that it has been pleasure to work on this article with you. I am only sorry that we have taken too much space on article discussion page. --Rjecina 18:33, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

text: First off, this is not a page about religion. The church information does not belong there. It's a geographic page with some history and settlements added in. Kukar, you cannot remove other people's edits at such a speedy rate with no talk or compromise, that is vandalism. Plus, the Serb population is only 4%. What are you talking about? This is an absolute majority Croatian town. --Jesuislafete 18:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Practice what you preach my friend. Why come to a page and delete large sections?? Why not come to this page and discuss why you believe that description of the churches should not be on the page. Other than these two places of worship and the Gradina what else is there to see in Vrlika? Yes, the current Serbian population is at 4%, according to you. What does that have to do with anything we are talking about here? Seems to me that you feel that if you erase the fact that the difference in years of the two churches being built is a way to get your point across. Kukar 19:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Unbelievable this guy just wont stop ruining this page.  Kukar 05:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Update: That IP address is blocked and this article has been protected. --Cheeser1 05:53, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great! Now we can talk on discussion page to make changes and not have to resort to undooing everyting. Cheers Kukar 12:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mhm

message: Please, give here in short, where do you cannot reach agreement. Kubura 14:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First off, this is not a page about religion. The church information does not belong there. It's a geographic page with some history and settlements added in. Kukar, you cannot remove other people's edits at such a speedy rate with no talk or compromise, that is vandalism. Plus, the Serb population is only 4%. What are you talking about? This is an absolute majority Croatian town. --Jesuislafete 18:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Practice what you preach my friend. Why come to a page and delete large sections?? Why not come to this page and discuss why you believe that description of the churches should not be on the page. Other than these two places of worship and the Gradina what else is there to see in Vrlika? Yes, the current Serbian population is at 4%, according to you. What does that have to do with anything we are talking about here? Seems to me that you feel that if you erase the fact that the difference in years of the two churches being built is a way to get your point across. Kukar 19:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disagreement points 

message: What is up with this?Kukar 19:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unbelievable this guy just wont stop ruining this page.  Kukar 05:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Update: That IP address is blocked and this article has been protected. --Cheeser1 05:53, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great! Now we can talk on discussion page to make changes and not have to resort to undooing everyting. Cheers Kukar 12:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism by 217.68.80.50 

message: First, Kukar, as I've seen, you've deleted the entry about the cityname in this change. 
You're not allowed to do that, that's vandalism.
Sorry that that fact (origin of the name is obviously Croat, in ikavian speech) disrupts your wishie-wishes.
Second, the Orthodox population in those times weren't called Serb Orthodox, but "Greek-Eastern believers", "grčkoistočni šizmatici", "arkači" (that's why I removed the adjective "Serb" in front of "Orthodox"). The Serb name among Orthodox believers in Croatia appeared in the 2nd part of 19th century, under the influence of Orthodox clergy, clergy that was taught in Orthodox seminary in (Syrmian) Karlovci, where the students were brainwashed with Serbhood. Also, that was the part of the top secret policy of Kingdom of Serbia, which needed artificial way to "create" Serbs on areas, where they never existed, in order to create the (fake) right for Serbia's territorial expansion at the expense of neighbouring peoples and countries. Serbia used Orthodox clergy as agents to spread Serb ideas among unliterate Croats of Orthodox faith.
Third, Kukar, have always in mind that that area was the core area of medieval Kingdom of Croatia, the core area, where the tribes that had a right and privilege to choose the Croat king were living. 
Fourth, Kukar, it's nice to see you bearing the name of the medieval Croat tribe (Kukari), that had a privilege to choose the Croat king. Kubura 07:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  My changes 

message: Here's the link that I've promised, Kukar. This is from book  (pdf file, 1,7 MB). Pages 223-224. It speaks about source Sumpetarski kartular:
"Tempore transacto erat consuetudo in regno Croatorum: erant septem bani qui eligerant regem in Croatia, quando rex sine liberis moriebatur, silicet: banus Croacie, primus; banus Bosniensis, secundus; banus Sclauonie, tertius; banus Posige, quartus; banus Podrauie, quintus; banus
Albanie sestus; banus Sremi, septimus. Et de sex generibus Croatorum erant bani in Croatia, quos eligebant duodecim tribus Croatorum, et de aliis sex generacionibus erant comites in comitatibus Croatie: Kacigi, Cucari, Snasci, Cudomirigi, Mogoruigi, Subigi: isti sunt principales quibus pertinet banatum et mitunt sortes cui eorum sors dederit ...Isti fuerunt bani in Croatia de genere Croatorum a tempore regis Suetopelegi usque ad tempus Suenimiri regis Croatorum: Stephanus Cucar, Saruba (...Mog ...Cacig ...car ...can), Slauaz ...(Cu)car fuit ...esimir, Cucar tempore Suenimiri Suenimiri fuit Petrus Sn(aci)g banus. Om(nes) isti fu(erunt).“
In Croatian: 
"U kraljevstvu Hrvata u prošlim vremenima bijaše običaj: bilo je sedam banova (bani) koji birahu kralja u Hrvatskoj, kada je kralj umro bez djece; naime: prvi, ban Hrvatske; drugi, ban bosanski; treći, ban Slavonije; četvrti, ban Požege; peti, ban Podravine; šesti, ban Albanije; sedmi,
ban Srijema. A od šest rodova hrvatskih bijahu banovi u Hrvatskoj, koje je biralo dvanaest plemena hrvatskih, a od šest drugih rodova bili su župani u županijama Hrvatske: Kačići, Kukari, Snačići, Čudomirići, Mogorovići, Šubići. Tim odličnicima je patrila banska čast (banatum), a kome će od njih dopasti, odlučuju ždrijebom... Ovo su bili banovi u Hrvatskoj od roda Hrvata, od vremena Svatopluka, sve do vremena Zvonimira, kralja Hrvata: Stjepan Kukar, Saruba (...Mog ... Kačić ... kar ...kan), Slavac ... (Ku)kar je bio ... ešimir, Kukar u vrijeme Zvonimira, Zvonimira ban je bio Petar Sna(ači)ć. Sv(i) ti bi(jahu) ... u Hrvat(skoj).“ Kubura (talk) 09:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kukari, ancient tribe of Croats 

message: Orthodox monastery Dragović was built on the foundations of the older Roman Catholic monastery. . Kubura 08:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You must be on some serious hallucinogens Kubura Kukar (talk) 17:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dragović 

message: You are too too funny haha! Kukar (talk) 16:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Kubura

message: My question is what is wrong with official web pages of Vrlika ? On this pages it is clearly writen legend about coming of Croats in VII century, about official documents of Croatian bishop in 1185, about turkish destruction of town in 1492, about Ortodox population of Vrlika in 1692, about building of road between 1805-1813, about Franz Josef visit, about religion situation in 1876, about Serbian mayors 1864-1939, about destruction in World War II when town has taken 24 times by different military forces. All this is not writen in article !! --Rjecina (talk) 05:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? Who removed it? --Jesuislafete (talk) 18:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked through the recent history and cannot find it. --Cheeser1 (talk) 18:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that somebody need to write this data in article. Vrlika is having history long 4,000 years (there are graves from 1700 BC) and nobody has writen anything about that. My english is bad so I will not write about that. If nobody want to write about that I will write raw facts on this talk page and then somebody will need to put this data in article (this will be long article) --Rjecina (talk) 15:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can give a few important facts (with rough translation from a source, and that follow NPOV/V/RS etc.) I can try to integrate them into the article, since I speak English natively. --Cheeser1 (talk) 18:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Official pages

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Vrlika. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130424004337/http://vrlika.hr/podstranice/zupni_ured.html to http://www.vrlika.hr/podstranice/zupni_ured.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130826192259/http://civljane.hr/podstranice/crkva.html to http://www.civljane.hr/podstranice/crkva.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:17, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified