Talk:Andrija Hebrang (politician, born 1946)

Title

I'd suggest moving the article to Andrija Hebrang (junior) (or perhaps Andrija Hebrang (son)), leaving a disambiguation page. GregorB (talk) 18:34, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea. --Jesuislafete (talk) 19:46, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Cyrillic name

The Serbian Cyrillic name is not based on his ethnicity but his birthplace, which was Serbia. The fact that he was born there means that the name form exists, and although this is an area in which there is no strict guideline, it has been observed across the board for all subjects born on Serbian territory regardless of ethnicity. Likewise, it is included when an ethnic Serb is born outside of Serbia. Please see the following examples: Goran Karan, Ivica Vrdoljak (Croatian); Peter Leko, Magdolna Rúzsa, Félix Lajkó, Monika Seles (Hungarian); it is a standard more than a policy. I believe that it sits harmlessly without offending anybody and my reason for its inclusion on top of the regular practice is that it explains to people how the subject would have had his name written in the language of the region where his parents opted to give birth to him. Any reason to change one, and the same user can spend weeks adjusting all of them on the same principle, but that will eventually pull the rug out from the system and soon we won't have any alternative names on any page. So in general, persons born in Serbia do not have to be Serbian to have a Cyrillic spelling. The most positive way to look at it is to seek information that can be added to the article rather than removed; if you know of a Serbian-born subject to have, say, Romanian family, apply the Romanian form by all means. It gives the reader more factual information.

If you still feel that the section is inappropriate standing where it is, I've always considered myself reasonable, tell me, and we can arrange something like we do with Kosovar subjects who are Albanian. There are plenty of solutions without having to rock the boat. User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 11:19, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

OK, I see what you are saying, but I still don't see the relevance of having the Serbian Cyrillic spelling on a name (including Goran Karan, Vrdoljak, etc). What historical use is this for? These people never use their "cyrillic" names in daily life, plus I see so much Latin script use in Serbia these days that I don't think anyone would be unable to recognize the English Latin form; and when I checked Serbian Wikipedia, I didn't see Latin conversions of Serbs born in Croatia. I want to know the Wikipedia policy on this before anything else. --Jesuislafete (talk) 21:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

You're right on two things: each language with its own Wikipedia has its own set of guidelines for usage and nothing is universal; and Latinic is very widely used in Serbian writing, no question. If it weren't for Croatian and Serbian both using the Ljudevid Gaj system, we would have had something similar to Magdolna Rúzsa whereby Cyrillic and Latinic would have been needed. The question here is whether we include Serbian or not. If so, then Cyrillic as a property of Serbian needs to remain in place, for it is not how a Croat would write Serbian that counts, but how the Serb does! The Serb in turn may use either script, and Cyrillic has pride of place in the language. However, perhaps there is no need for Serbian at all, and this is what I have been thinking about. I need to examine this practice closer; if you really believe that subjects of one ethnicity born in a land where their names would be written differently do not need to have names displayed in local languages, it would mean having to make removals on every person listed. This is turn goes far beyond subjects in this part of the world. To this end, this isn't really the page for that discussion. Either way, I have made an amendment and taken the Serbian Cyrillic out of the opening line (as it really is not that vital) and reduced it to a footnote. This practice is already in place with Kosovan subjects such as Hashim Thaçi and others (for other reasons discussed by NOAH and me, we use Latinic only there). It has been all right so far. I'll do the same with Vrdoljak and co. Do you feel that this is a better solution? User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 23:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps so. I asked this question on Wikipedia:WikiProject Croatia and I think user Joy answered well; that if "..the Cyrillic spelling should be listed in the intro of the English Wikipedia article only if there is tangible evidence that this person made significant things in any context where the said spelling was used. For example, if they also had a career in Serbia or something like that.." Because honestly, it just seems very confusing and strange to have people like Andrija Hebrang having a Cyrillic name next to the English Latin one when he really has nothing to do with Serbia or Montenegro, or any country that uses the script a lot. But people like Josip Broz Tito on the other hand, who was not a Serb/Montenegrin/Macedonian or born there, should have the Cyrillic script because of his vast importance in those countries. --Jesuislafete (talk) 06:37, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Right, so we need to weight the level of importance of subject and birthplace. I gather this subject is by no way a Belgrader. But did his parents actually originate from Serbia? (There are and were a great number of Serbian Croats just as you have Croatian Serbs). Do you know how long the subject lived in Belgrade or Serbia? If the whole thing were nothing but in passing, then there is no need for a Serbian rendition. And how does the current version suit you? (Cyrillic in footnote). User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 10:14, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The real question here is not whether a Cyrillic form of his name exists or not (all kinds of things exist), but whether it is relevant or not (what an encyclopedia is all about). A Gedankenexperiment: let's say A.H. was born in China and had a birth certificate in Chinese. Would his Chinese name be useful and relevant enough for this article? (Please note: I'm not saying anything about the relevance of languages themselves, but about the relevance of their use in a particular situation.) I think we can safely say that the answer is no. GregorB (talk) 10:17, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Do I take it then that I should amend the currect revision to even remove it as a footnote? Or can it stay there as a ceremonial side piece just to ackowledge birthplace convention? User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 11:05, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

No, neither of Hebrang's parents originated from Belgrade, that was one of the points I was making. He happened to be born there due to his father's role in the new Yugoslavian government, much like Tudjman's children. I agree, that if these are Croats of Serbia we are talking about, then there is certainly reason for their Cyrillic name spelling. But people like Hebrang and Goran Karan do no warrant such an addition, as GregorB stated above.--Jesuislafete (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

All right, I accept your explanation. The Cyrillic name will not be returned. I believe this matter is concluded. User:Evlekis (Евлекис) 01:03, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Andrija Hebrang (son). 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nacional.hr/en/clanak/18321/hebrangs-difficult-character-and-intolerance-will-cost-sanader-his-government
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nacional.hr/clanak/10863/hebrangova-teska-i-iskljuciva-narav-stajat-ce-sanadera-vlasti
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110522075236/http://www.hdz.hr/default.aspx?id=126 to http://www.hdz.hr/default.aspx?id=126

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:19, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Andrija Hebrang (father) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:48, 30 May 2021 (UTC)