Talk:Republic of Ragusa

message: From what I understand, the original motto was in Latin and I don't know Latin, but the motto in Italian would be better translated in English as "Liberty is not to be sold for all the gold in the world".MihaiC (talk) 04:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes that's would be a better translation. --Theirrulez (talk) 23:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motto 

message: This article needs quite a bit of editing. Parts of it are in terrible English and other parts look like they could have come from Gibbons Decline and fall of the Roman Empire!1812ahill (talk) 22:01, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article's use of language. 

message: I remember clearly that the coat of arms on this page was this , this is also the official CoA of Dubrovnik even today and it was shown here as well before someone changed it into current version. First let me start by saying that the current coat of arms is not a historical one. In fact it is a result of a wrong interpretation. It is well sourced that the CoA of the Dubrovnik Republic was the old Hungarian royal CoA (barry of 8 argent and gules - Arpad dynasty CoA with 8 red and white (silver) lines) and that the flag was the one with St.Blasius. It was decreed by law since 1360s when the Dubrovnik Republic accepted suzerainty of the Hungarian (and Croatian king) Louis I, all other symbols were outlawed as in the city and also in the republic as a whole. The change of white lines into blue ones was a wrong interpretation that appeared in later period after the republic was abolished due to CoA's with templates within the white lines (it was common at that time to decorate CoA's with various templates and decorative lines) which turned to blue color due to deterioration of the paper and the ink. These first appeared in around 18th century to emphasize to the silver (white) color. Shokatz (talk) 18:22, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like you're right. If I recall, I only switched the coa because a couple Italian users complained the old one was unsourced (as it was). One request: please insert the sources so we don't have to go through this again. -- Director (talk) 01:57, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Will do. Do I just insert them in the source section of the image? I was actually thinking of maybe even creating/translating the 'Coat of Arms of Dubrovnik Republic' article from Croatian Wikipedia since it is very well written and well sourced. Or maybe to create a subsection on this article? Shokatz (talk) 14:45, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: My advice would be to create a Coat of arms of Dubrovnik article, since both the Republic and the modern city apparently use the same coa. In fact, I just created one :). Also created the Flag of Dubrovnik article. -- Director (talk) 02:54, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah well...since you already created them I will see to expand on those. :) Shokatz (talk) 14:28, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong Coat of Arms 

message: Removed the section "In European and World History," as its only assertion (that Ragusa was the first nation to recognize US independence) was both not supported by the supplied source (which only says that Ragusa was "among the first") and contradicts the lengthy and well-supported article "US-Morocco relations"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Utuu (talk • contribs) 20:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  In European and World History 

message: The latter, surprisingly (at least to me), seems to yield more results on search engines (about twice as many as Republic of Ragusa). Same for scholar.google.com. Does that have any bearing on how this article should be named? The only reason why I even compared the search volumes to begin with is because a user implied, while making a revert on another article on WP (Dalmatia), that "Republic of Dubrovnik" is not how it's called in English and that "Republic of Ragusa" is the proper name. 78.0.192.37 (talk) 15:15, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I have 18,000 hits for "République de Raguse" and 8,400 hits for "République de Dubrovnik'...--Lubiesque (talk) 15:57, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, but this is about English usage and the English Wikipedia, not about French language. Conventions will obviously differ between languages (with local Slavic terminology not even having a "Republika Raguza" or anything similar). For one, the English Encyclopedia Britannica doesn't seem to have a mention of "Republic of Ragusa" in its article about Dubrovnik, instead it  uses "Republic Dubrovnik". 78.0.192.37 (talk) 17:06, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

text: Gbook hits, in this case, is inessential. I don't see a move to "Republic of Dubrovnik" plausible. 21st-century English sources favour Ragusa, while the use of "Republic of Dubrovnik (Ragusa)" and likes is widespread. As per hisorical actuality, "Ragusa" is the name.--Zoupan 17:20, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I stumbled by chance upon this article and discussion. I agree with Zoupan. Ragusa is ubdoubtedly the historical name of the city. All tags and official documents visible in the city and dating before the 1900s refer to it with this name. The name Dubrovnik started appearing on documents and tags in the 20th century, when the Republic was no longer existing. Greetings from Dubrovnik/Ragusa!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.72.96.205 (talk) 22:13, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Being it is an English Wikipedia, English results make more sense than Italian. Seems obvious to me. I think changing to Republic of Dubrovnik or perhaps have it in parentheses makes more sense and is fair. The names Dubrovnik and Ragusa coexisted for centuries. Dubrovnik used since the 12th century. Dubrovnik was a name used for a while before the 20th century by citizens there. They are different names for the same city in different languages. Seems kind of like Croatia/Hrvatska. It confuses people often it is the same country or city. And every language has a different adaptation.74.101.190.2 (talk) 14:40, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Republic of Ragusa vs. Republic of Dubrovnik 

message: For other side the Serb-Catholic movement in Dubrovnik was a pan-Serb cultural and political campaign in Dubrovnik active at various periods between the 1830s and the interwar period. The group of local Catholic intellectuals, known as Serb-Catholics, espoused a Serb sentiment, who understood to Dubrovnik as a city historically under Serbian heritage. Banac, Ivo (1983), "The Confessional "Rule" and the Dubrovnik Exception: The Origins of the "Serb-Catholic" Circle in Nineteenth-Century Dalmatia", Slavic Review (Slavic Review, Vol. 42, No. 3) 42 (3): 448–474, doi:10.2307/2496046, JSTOR 2496046; https://www.jstor.org/stable/2496046?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents *Goran Mladineo: Prikaz knjige: Nikola Tolja, Dubrovački Srbi katolici – istine i zablude, vlastita naklada, Dubrovnik, 2011., 711 str, Časopis za suvremenu povijest br. 3/2012., str. 800-803
Before the fall of the republic, nobody talk about the etnicity, The modern concept of nationality, based on ethnic concepts as language, culture, religion, custom, etc., was developed only in the 19th century. For this reason the attribution of a definite "nationality" or ethnic affiliation to personalities of the previous centuries, living in ethnically mixed regions, is often indeterminable;  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.105.114.171 (talk) 17:56, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: "the attribution of a definite "nationality" or ethnic affiliation to personalities of the previous centuries, living in ethnically mixed regions, is often indeterminable" correct, but then why do you want to mention a movement that covered 0,1% od Dubrovnik's population in the late 19th century? That doesn't even relate to this article as this one covers the period of the Republic of Ragusa that lasted until 1807. Tzowu (talk) 18:15, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

text: Yes, this does not even belong to the same period covered by this article. Detoner (talk) 18:11, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete 

message: Do they have their own Wikipedia page? Alexis Ivanov (talk) 10:05, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Alexis Ivanov, in these cases it always helps to check the Wikipedias in the related languages (i.e. Croatian/Italian here) as well as the major Wikipedias (German, French, Spanish, Russian). The itwiki has a list: . Constantine   ✍  14:59, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you very much, I forgot to check them. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 23:14, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can I get a list of their rulers? 

message: Regarding this and this, comments are needed on the material. IP initially reverted with "nationalist propaganda" rationale. Then the IP reverted claiming to have read the sources. I'll alert the relevant WikiProjects (those seen at the top of this talk page) to this matter. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:37, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Quote from source cited within article:  From source I believe his edits are correct; although  should be modified to mention that the southern Slavs were so christianized, not all Slavs. -- Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:31, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

text: I'm not familiar with the subject, but if those are the only sources, I would argue against including this text. I would be wary of using only Serbian sources here to back such statements. Daß Wölf 18:21, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Iazyges and Daß Wölf, thanks for weighing in. I just wanted more eyes, and especially those more knowledgeable on the topic than me. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:37, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  IP edits 

message: I don’t believe I see a source or strong one at that backing this up. The Name had existed before Turks moved into the area, no? The name Dubrovnik of the Adriatic city is first recorded in the Charter of Ban Kulin (1189). It is mostly explained as , a Celtic name for water (Gaulish , Irish , Welsh , Cornish ), akin to the toponyms , Dover, and ; or originating from a Proto-Slavic word  meaning 'oak'. The term  means the 'oakwood', as in all other Slavic languages the word , , means 'oak' and ,  means the 'oakwood'.  74.101.190.2 (talk) 14:42, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stated in the article that Dubrovnik was Derive by a Turkish word?