| Revision as of 06:56, 25 September 2009 editAradic-es (talk | contribs)2,058 edits →HERZEGOVINA← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:53, 27 February 2024 edit undoGovernor Sheng (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users21,198 editsNo edit summary | ||
| (48 intermediate revisions by 21 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Talk header}} | |||
| ⚫ | {{WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina |
||
| {{WikiProject banner shell |class=C | | |||
| ⚫ | {{WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina |importance=Top}} | ||
| {{WikiProject Croatia |importance=High}} | |||
| }} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
| |archiveheader = {{aan}} | |||
| |maxarchivesize = 150K | |||
| |counter = 1 | |||
| |minthreadsleft = 1 | |||
| |algo = old(30d) | |||
| |archive = Talk:Canton 10/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| }} | |||
| == How do you say the "10" in Croatian/Bosnian/Serbian? == | |||
| I originally posted most of this at ]: | |||
| Surely they don't say "ten" ] (]) 15:30, 15 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
| If someone wishes for us to change the name by which the canton is referenced, an explanation less silly than "Some bosnian islamic nationalists call this canton "West Bosnia Canton" to make a reference to Greater Bosnia" will have to be provided. The term "Zapadnobosanski Kanton" is widely used, in official institutions too, and in a non-derogatory manner, a simple Google search shows this, so there's little or no point in trying to claim that it's some evil Bosniak conspiracy. Please be rational. --] 12:30, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Fair use rationale for Image:Herzeg Bosnia.gif== | |||
| ] | |||
| ''']''' is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in '''this''' Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with ]. | |||
| :They do say "ten" in their respective language (''deset''). ] (]) 15:19, 16 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
| Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. | |||
| == "Herzeg-Bosnian Canton", flag and coat of arms are unconstitutional == | |||
| If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale2 -->] 22:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Even though the cantonal government uses the name "Herzeg-Bosnian Canton", the Herzeg-Bosnian flag and coat of arms, the constitutional court of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina ruled the name and symbols . With this, they are unrecognized by the government of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. At least some annotations ''(de jure, de facto)'' should be put in place. ] (]) 11:06, 5 October 2023 (UTC) | |||
| ==Recent edits== | |||
| The symbols and name were found unconstitutional stop pushing your pov. ] (]) 19:41, 3 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Until there appear to be symbols accepted on both sides. .. these ones will stay. Misplaced Pages does not obey not any constituition!! YOU should stop pushing your POV!! here you can not outvote somebody! | |||
| --] (]) 09:39, 7 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Page protected == | |||
| I've protected this article for two weeks and hopefully a solution can be found. I see the dispute is whether ] and ] should be added to the infobox. I haven't examined this issue in detail, but this seems to be a case of ] vs. ] status. | |||
| Infoboxes generally only include official symbols. Since the flag and coat of arms seem to be used as de facto symbols despite being ruled unconstitutional, perhaps they can be taken out of the infobox and put under a section explaining their status. Would this be an acceptable solution for both sides? | |||
| ] (]) 01:57, 14 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
| Hi Spellcast! | |||
| As I have already explained at ]... | |||
| these symbols are: | |||
| *de jure:partially accepted-used by the local governement but not accepted at the federal level | |||
| *de facto: absolutely accepted | |||
| --] (]) 06:29, 14 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :To avoid duplicate conversations, we'll continue the discussion there. ] (]) 10:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == names == | |||
| the local government referrs the Canton 10 as "hercegbosanska zupanija" | |||
| that counts as "native name" even if it is not official.--] (]) 15:47, 15 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Same situation with the symbols, the name was found unconstitutional, this is already explained on the page as per the consensus. 15:56, 15 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
| There is not any court that has jurisdiction over this. Therefore it is meaningless.--] (]) 14:47, 24 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == HERZEGOVINA == | |||
| OK, efendija PRODUCER | |||
| Could you explain me what is the problem with this sentence: | |||
| {{quote|That geography proof is however disputed since the boarders of ] are not strictly geographically and especially not '''legally''' determined. }} | |||
| *Are claiming that ] borders are determined? And you know them? | |||
| *if they are , give us some sources for that! | |||
| --] (]) 14:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| :Thanks for the compliment. I'm not the one adding new information it's up to you to provide sources. Stop returning the name we've gone over this nonsense, for the last time '''do not return it''', it has been declared unconstitutional. ] (]) 14:55, 24 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::You have not answered my question!--] (]) 06:56, 25 September 2009 (UTC)] | |||
Latest revision as of 18:53, 27 February 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Canton 10 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
How do you say the "10" in Croatian/Bosnian/Serbian?
Surely they don't say "ten" 2.217.239.72 (talk) 15:30, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
- They do say "ten" in their respective language (deset). Governor Sheng (talk) 15:19, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
"Herzeg-Bosnian Canton", flag and coat of arms are unconstitutional
Even though the cantonal government uses the name "Herzeg-Bosnian Canton", the Herzeg-Bosnian flag and coat of arms, the constitutional court of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina ruled the name and symbols unconstitutional. With this, they are unrecognized by the government of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. At least some annotations (de jure, de facto) should be put in place. BenjoKing99 (talk) 11:06, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
Categories: