Talk:Croatia/Archive 2

message: I would like to put in evidence,in Istria and Dalmatia region the presence of an italian community of 40000 inhabitants (on wiki only 15.000 is reported).
Any way these two regions, also during austrian domincance period, the population was for more the 96% italian because originally venetian or Friulan. (same for the slovenian part of Istria)
That's why italian is widely spoken in Abbazia, Pula, Fiume, etc
(Michele Jurkovic from Capodistria)
:there are 14.284 italians in Istria county and 19.636 total in croatia acording to 2001 census http://www.dzs.hr/Hrv/censuses/Census2001/Popis/H01_03_10/H01_03_10.html, Italian in Fiume is spoken by some old people on west side of city (only when they talk to eachother).
On this web page, they say italian speaking are 70.000 whose 30.000 italians and the other former italians.  http://www.ethnologue.com/show_country.asp?name=HR
Can you suggest me where to find more info about Istria ethnic history? thanks
I was just going through the Croatia page, and noticed there was no mention of croats' Persian origin. To me, this was a well-known fact based on the studies I've had read before, genetics, historical artifacts, geographical evidence and etc. Just to refresh my memory, I googled it and seems like a well-known universal thing. http://www.geocities.com/irnationalsocialism/croatia.html
Is there a particular reason why this is sensored?
--LogiPhi 16:35,-- 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Persian origin of the Croatian ethnic name is indeed a well-known fact. As for genetic studies there are only few and rather speculative. Historical, archeological and geographical (?) evidences are not at all known to me.--domnius
:The origin of the Croats is irrelevant for this article. It's explained in detail in the Croats article (see the History and Genetics sections there). --Zmaj 14:54, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: [quote]A tribe of Croats came to the Roman provinces of Dalmatia and Pannonia in the seventh century and was ultimately assimilated into the larger native Illyro-Roman and recently arrived Slavic population which took the same name.[/quote]
croat tribe _is_ that slavic population, if not what is the origin of croat tribe, and who were the slavs that took croatian name? Why would they took it if they were dominant?(slavic people assimilated others the proof is today's language and culture in croatia) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.172.162.109 (talk) 16:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Origin of people living in the area known as Croatia 

message: The Serbs are a little more guilty than the rest of us in the Former Yugoslavia. They should be the last ones accussing anyone of anything///Evergreen Montenegro1 23:02, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  THE TRUTH 

message: I suggest putting the pictures into the new Gallery section (nije pregledno). --HolyRomanEmperor 15:47, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallery 

message: My old commnet, please keep deleted.
I need to study the history a little more and give some sources.
I was told thast Croats did have  rule over Serbia...when ?? Iam not sure. If someone knows they can add to it.
Intersting note Dalmatian terrotory was all of former Yugoslavia once, although this was before the arrival of Slavs...still intersting note.
Evergreen Montenegro1 22:52, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Croat rule over Serbia and Bosnia in 900s 

message: The war in Croatia was not a civil one, it was, by wikipedias own clasification , a war for liberation. . . 
A War of Liberation is a conflict which is primarily intended to bring freedom or independence to a nation or group. Examples might include a war to overthrow a colonial power, or to remove a dictator from power. Such wars are often unconventional.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.139.79.58 (talk • contribs) 12:53, 20 January 2006
: That is a bit POV view, mate. From thy point-of-view, the Serbian Army was trying to "liberate" Sarajevo in 1991-1995 and "free" the ethnic Bosnian Moslem soil in Eastern Bosnia and Herzegovina. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Civil war? 

message: I can't see why Croatia's partnership with La Francophonie should occupy any space in the introduction. Observer status is the lowest status a country may have in that organisation. This data is very insignificant compared to the other pieces of info there (former republic in SFRY, independence, EU candidate). Croatia's observer status in the Non-Aligned movement or its cooperation with the International Olympic Committee could be also mentioned by the same principle. (Posted by User:Cukor in Revision as of 16:49, February 21, 2006)
*It struck me as odd, too.  Really how many people actually parlez Français in Croatia, any way? MJCdetroit 17:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You'd be surprised, mon ami detroitien. But you're right, it's irrelevant. I'll remove it. --Zmaj 21:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why you think a reference to the observer status in La Francophonie is controversial. If you just take a look at Slovenia page for a moment you will find that the country "...is also a member of the Council of Europe, NATO, and has observer status in La Francophonie". No one seems to be bothered by that reference there! Why is then this reference on Croatia page such a big problem? EurowikiJ 10:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's not controversial, it's irrelevant for the lead section. Kindly RTFM. --Joy [shallot] 12:42, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole issue had actually been resolved a month ago and I decided that it is not worth pursuing it. But to avoid any further comments I am withdrawing it. EurowikiJ 13:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  La Francophonie 

message: It would great if someone could put in an audiofile correctly pronouncing the native name of Croatia.  I'm very interested in hearing this "seemingly impossible to pronounce" name. --Ttownfeen 01:37, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your wish is my command ;) --Dr.Gonzo 00:42, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's a good idea, but I don't think that that pronunciation is the most typical! :) The recording has a stress on the first syllable the same way the kajkavian speakers say it, but the stress continues a bit onto the second syllable the way shtokavian speakers do. Then again, it would probably be confusing if we had several files for such an essential word. Perhaps if we found one of HRT's old school speakers to say it, that would be best :) --Joy [shallot] 12:48, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hey, if you can get someone like that to record it, please do... Maybe if we just cut it out of some tv or radio broadcast and ask for permission to put it up? Anyways, I tried to pronounce it as neutral as possible, but being a Zagreb native it may sound a little bit regional... You're welcome to try and improve upon it though ;) --Dr.Gonzo 23:26, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

text:  Either way, thanks for putting it in! --Ttownfeen 22:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're welcome, of course. I was wondering do you find the "unpronouncable" statement true now that you've heard it? --Dr.Gonzo 23:28, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronounciation of Native Name