File talk:Serbia1918.png

message: This new map is horrible, ugly and completelz incorect compared to the previous one.
:No, it is not incorrect. Problem with previous map was that it showed situation in 1918, but with borders that were defined only in 1920. This map show situation in 1918 with borders as they were in 1918, thus it is correct. PANONIAN 13:45, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure it is incorrect. The map shows the lands controlled by the Serbian army at a certain point in the year 1918. Just before the neutral zone between the Serbian and Romanian army was established in 1919. Timisoara, Pecs were never part of Serbia. --fz22 08:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  But I do not claim that these borders were internationally recognized. As you said, these lands were controlled by the Serbian army and proclaimed official unification with Serbia, thus "de facto" it were borders of Serbia from November 26 1918 to December 1, 1918. We have many other maps with "de facto" borders of various countries in Wikipedia, so I do not see why this one would be different. PANONIAN 16:47, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If this map about we speak is OK then in I will create map of Romania in august 1919 where Romania will be all international accepted territory of Romania + Hungary under Romanian occupation. Can somebody say something about that sort of map ? Rjecina 14:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

text: And another one with Austria-Hungary in 1916 when the southern "border" of Hungary will be around Skopje and Bitolj. Lets make wikipedia as confusing as possible. Zello 00:59, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if that's our goal, why not put them all on one single map, with undecipherable little lines that all run together? Surely no one will be able to take any meaningful understanding from it ;) Parsecboy 01:04, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

text: No, the territories within Serbia in this time did not had different statuses. For example, Vojvodina proclaimed unification with Serbia as an autonomous region with its own government. However, Serbian government recognized only unification, but Vojvodinian autonomous government was never recognized by Serbia. Also, I do not remember that I said or wrotte that "area around Pécs was an area where Serbs were the largest ethnic group and were liberated by Serbia". Map does not say anything about "liberation" or "occupation" question - it simply show areas de facto controled, administered and annexed by Serbia on November 25, 1918. Nothing more and nothing less. PANONIAN 22:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

text: This assembly has been farse. Can anybody neutral think that Hungarians, Germans and Romanians which are making 54.5 % of population (in 1910) has voted for union with Serbia. Similar situation has happen in Montenegro in november of 1918. "Neutral" parlament has voted for union with Serbian then around 45 days it has started military revolt against Serbian occupation ! Normal Serbian way of doing things is occupation after which come wish of local population to become members of Serbian state. Example we can find in Yugoslav wars when Krajina after it has been "liberated" from Croatia has voted for union with Serbia (Serbia has not accepted or refused this union). ----Rjecina 14:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are wrong. The assembly did had representatives of German people as well as one representative of Hungarian people. It did not had representatives of Romanian people, but we may say that majority of ethnicities were represented. Regarding Krajina, do you want to say that Serbs from Krajina would rather live under pro-fascist Tuđman government instead within independent Krajina? PANONIAN 22:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: I'm really curious why do you use terms Pécs and Timoşoara on a map containing Serbia. Why don't you use Pečuj and Temišvar instead? (Or, why are you using let's say Subotica, why not Szabadka?)
Fcsaba 10:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because Wikipedia naming conventions say that most common names used in English should be here, thus I followed the conventions... By the way, I also used name Skopje instead Skoplje. PANONIAN 22:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pécs + Timoşoara 

message: ===Rjecina 1st time...===
This image is on list for deleting from 29. July.
Reasons given is unencyclopedic image. (Serbia borders which has never been international accepted). This map can be OK if different regions with different political situations are having different colors. Example for that is:
*Kingdom of Serbia red color (color is only example)
::Wikipedia have many other articles and maps about territories and countries whose borders were not "internationally accepted". Some examples: Independent State of Croatia, Northern Cyprus, Somaliland, Western Bosnia, etc, etc. If we did not deleted such articles and maps because these borders were not "internationally accepted" then we have no reason to delete this one as well. Second, I do not understand why you proposed this for deletion if you by yourself said that "map can be OK if different regions with different political situations are having different colors" - by  this you admitting that map is not wrong and that mean that you have no right to propose it for deletion. Regarding map colour that was already discussed on this talk page: map does not show "different political situations", but only one political situation from November 25, 1918 to December 1, 1918. PANONIAN 04:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Map show Montenegro AFTER unification with Serbia, thus there is no reason to be in different colour. PANONIAN 04:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hungary was not internationally recognized state in this time and therefore these areas were not internatially recognized as parts of Hungary. Also, the map show these territories AFTER they officially united with Serbia when occupation was officially ended. Peace agreements from 1919 abnd 1920 only defined exact borders, but did not changed genertal status of these territories, which were in 1919 internationally recognized as parts of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. Also, as I said, the map show political situation only from November 25, 1918 to December 1, 1918 and in this time territories that were assigned to different countries by 1919/1920 peace treaties did not had different political status and would not be correct to paint them in different colour. PANONIAN 04:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

text: No. As I said, peace treaties were in 1919/1920, not in 1918, so how can what you proposing to show "real situation in november of 1918"? PANONIAN 04:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I told you already: the map show political situation only from Novermber 25 1918 to December 1, 1918, so you cannot show on that map political situations from 1919 and 1920. Also, as I said, Hungary was not internationally recognized state in this time and therefore these areas were not internatially recognized as parts of Hungary. Also, the map show these territories AFTER they officially united with Serbia when occupation was officially ended. PANONIAN 04:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

text: It is just your opinion that unification was farse. Montenegrin society was divided among issue about unification with Serbia. The people that started this revolt were not same people that voted for unification. PANONIAN 04:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Sure, writte this 1,000 times if you want (if you think that you are an parrot whose purpose in life is to repeat same things to death, who am I to claim opposite?), it is obvious that you making farse from this talk page, but anyway, my answers for you are in two previous sections and you just have to read them again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_talk:Serbia1918.png#Deleting PANONIAN 23:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleting

message: This image is on list for deleting from 29. July.
Reasons given is unencyclopedic image. (Serbia borders which has never been international accepted). This map can be OK if different regions with different political situations are having different colors. Example for that is:
*Kingdom of Serbia red color (color is only example)
::Wikipedia have many other articles and maps about territories and countries whose borders were not "internationally accepted". Some examples: Independent State of Croatia, Northern Cyprus, Somaliland, Western Bosnia, etc, etc. If we did not deleted such articles and maps because these borders were not "internationally accepted" then we have no reason to delete this one as well. Second, I do not understand why you proposed this for deletion if you by yourself said that "map can be OK if different regions with different political situations are having different colors" - by  this you admitting that map is not wrong and that mean that you have no right to propose it for deletion. Regarding map colour that was already discussed on this talk page: map does not show "different political situations", but only one political situation from November 25, 1918 to December 1, 1918. PANONIAN 04:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Map show Montenegro AFTER unification with Serbia, thus there is no reason to be in different colour. PANONIAN 04:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hungary was not internationally recognized state in this time and therefore these areas were not internatially recognized as parts of Hungary. Also, the map show these territories AFTER they officially united with Serbia when occupation was officially ended. Peace agreements from 1919 abnd 1920 only defined exact borders, but did not changed genertal status of these territories, which were in 1919 internationally recognized as parts of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. Also, as I said, the map show political situation only from November 25, 1918 to December 1, 1918 and in this time territories that were assigned to different countries by 1919/1920 peace treaties did not had different political status and would not be correct to paint them in different colour. PANONIAN 04:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

text: No. As I said, peace treaties were in 1919/1920, not in 1918, so how can what you proposing to show "real situation in november of 1918"? PANONIAN 04:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rjecina 1st time...

message: If you have not see that first (on now deleted page) and second time (now) this is 3rd time:
*Kingdom of Serbia red color (color is only example)
*Kingdom of Montenegro which has declared union with Serbia in november 1918 yelow color
*Teritory of Hungary under Serbian occupation given to Serbia after peace agreements 1919/20 blue color
*Teritory of Hunagry under Serbian occupation given to Romania after peace agreements 1919/20 black color
*Teritory of Hungary under Serbian occupation given to Hungary after peace agreements 1919/20 purple color.
:::I told you already: the map show political situation only from Novermber 25 1918 to December 1, 1918, so you cannot show on that map political situations from 1919 and 1920. Also, as I said, Hungary was not internationally recognized state in this time and therefore these areas were not internatially recognized as parts of Hungary. Also, the map show these territories AFTER they officially united with Serbia when occupation was officially ended. PANONIAN 04:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is just your opinion that unification was farse. Montenegrin society was divided among issue about unification with Serbia. The people that started this revolt were not same people that voted for unification. PANONIAN 04:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rjecina 2nd time...

message: If you have not see that first (on now deleted page) and second time (now) this is 4rd time:
*Kingdom of Serbia red color (color is only example)
*Kingdom of Montenegro which has declared union with Serbia in november 1918 yelow color
*Teritory of Hungary under Serbian occupation given to Serbia after peace agreements 1919/20 blue color
*Teritory of Hunagry under Serbian occupation given to Romania after peace agreements 1919/20 black color
*Teritory of Hungary under Serbian occupation given to Hungary after peace agreements 1919/20 purple color.
If it is needed I will write this 10 times or everytime when you change my editing on this discussion page. Why Montenegro in different color. Because declaration of union during occupation is farse which is best shown in Montenegro revolt against Serbia/Yugoslavia occupation.  Only person without any culture is writing between words of other people. ----Rjecina 04:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, writte this 1,000 times if you want (if you think that you are an parrot whose purpose in life is to repeat same things to death, who am I to claim opposite?), it is obvious that you making farse from this talk page, but anyway, my answers for you are in two previous sections and you just have to read them again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_talk:Serbia1918.png#Deleting PANONIAN 23:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rjecina sold...

message: On my map it's included... --PaxEquilibrium 22:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, that is common mistake. For example book named "Nestajanje Srba" (Tomislav Bogavac, Niš, 1994) show Syrmia without its south-west part (Šokadija) and the map in the book named "Spomenica oslobođenja Sombora 1918-1998" (Rade Šumonja, Sombor, 1998) show a detailed map of Syrmia with all places from which deputies were sent to assembly in Ruma and, according to this map, no single deputy from Šokadija was not sent to this assembly. PANONIAN 22:37, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Western Syrmia? 

message: gosh  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Feta (talk • contribs) 15:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Macedonia was included into Kingdom of Serbia in 1912 and remained part of it until 1918 when Kingdom of SCS was created. See the map with situation in 1913 as reference: http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/Balkans1913.jpg PANONIAN 19:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  macedonia  in that map of serbia of 1918? are you kidding us? stop propagating here! 

message: And eastern Banat were occupied by Romanians no? Can you fix that error ? --Čeha (razgovor) 23:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not in November 1918. My map represent only situation in November 1918 and in this time most of Banat was under Serbian control. Central Banat was later turned into neutral zone and assigned to Romania (but that happened in 1919). See a map as reference: http://terkepek.adatbank.transindex.ro/kepek/netre/167.gif PANONIAN 19:47, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temišvar 

message: I saw many maps on Serbian history but I never saw this map. Not in the single book or article on the History of Serbia. Can you please show us any other map similar to this one, from some reliable source? --Mladifilozof (talk) 16:44, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do not repeat same question in several places. This map is located in Wikimedia Commons and I already gave you an answer to this question there: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Serbia1918.png#original_research.3F PANONIAN 21:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  original research?