| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ivan Bunić Vučić article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Title edit
I really don't understand why this person's name would be primarily Italian. Google can barely find a non-Wikipedia reference for the Italian name:
- http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Giovanni+Serafino+Bona%22+-wikipedia
- http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Serafino+Bona%22+-wikipedia
- http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Ivan+Bunic+Vucic%22+-wikipedia
- http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Bunic+Vucic%22+-wikipedia
- http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Ivan+Bunić+Vučić%22+-wikipedia
- http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Bunić+Vučić%22+-wikipedia
- http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Dzivo+Bunic+Vucic%22+-wikipedia
- http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Dživo+Bunić+Vučić%22+-wikipedia
The three hits shown on the first link are actually from Wikipedia pages. Granted, there aren't many other Croatian name hits, but there are at least some... so what are we talking about here? --Joy [shallot] 13:47, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- I don't understand why the Italianicised name should be listed at all. It has basically no relevant hits on the web and books.google.com. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 16:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not always a reliable source of information... Look at the photo and the name shown underneath. As Caboga says (on the House of Bona page), just because 9 out of 10 people say the world is flat doesn't actually mean it is.
- Debona.michel (talk) 09:14, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- There is no evidence that that painting was signed by Ivan Bunič Vučić himself. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 18:00, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
You sound desperate, Debona. Your elitist views are luckily not part of Wikipedia policy. In other words, if 9 out of 10 people say the world is flat, then Wikipedia would have a "Flatness of the World" article. Luckily, 9 out of 10 people are usually right, just like in this case. You'll have to find some other place that will find your "everybody's wrong and I'm right" rhetoric appealing. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 11:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- What, so you mean to say the world is not flat? I don't believe it. WTF are you talking about? AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 11:22, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
"WTF" is not part of Wikipedia policy either. Practice what you preach. For a 19-year old you have a very BIG mouth...smart aleck! Please save everything you are writing and re-read it in 20 yrs...you'll see how funny you were. Talk about desperate... Debona.michel (talk) 12:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
If others and yourself found you amusing when you were my age perhaps you should not take that as a sign that all of us must act in such a comic manner. Talking about other people's age when lacking proper arguments is not something one would expect from an older gentlemen such as yourself, maybe you're fifteen...? --DIREKTOR (TALK) 12:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
BONA vs BUNIC edit
Please refer to the discussion pages for Marino de BONA (incorrectly entered as Marin Bunic), House of Bona and Republic of Ragusa (discussion topic 21). The names of de BONA family (and most of the other original Ragusan aristocracy families) are being forcefully Slavicized in writings by people who are in denial when it comes to Dubrovnik's history. No one is claiming that these people were not Dalmatians/Slavs/Ragusans, it's just that they used the BONA name like they still do today in Croatia.Not BUNIC!!! Some people think that calling them Bunic makes them more "Croatian"...I guess a very large chunk of Croatia would need to have their names' "reassigned" in this case.
82.226.211.122 (talk) 15:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
- Nonsense, in 99% of the cases of Old Dubrovnik classical literature the nobilty name was always Slavic, even when pieces were printed in Venice. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 16:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
- Utter nonsense. This post simply confirms my argument: there must be no exceptions from proper procedure or there will be widespread edit-warring. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 17:09, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
- What I said is true. It's almost always Slavic in their works. Try reading some. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 17:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
- Um, I meant I agree with what you said :) --DIREKTOR (TALK) 18:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
- Oh I see :D I'm just sick of Ragusino/Michel.de bona and other folks ascribing Slavic names to some " 20th century Yugoslavism", when in fact they have recorded use from the earliest literary period! In pieces that I've read, Romance names occur very rarely. E.g. In Palmotić's Gomnaida:
- Ti di Sorgo ružiš kuću
- paček od nje rug i feca,
- kô njekoga padre Ćućuv
- sva te prstom kažu djeca,
- o kursare obarani!
- Vȁs si govnen, kneže usrani!
- ^_^ --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 14:08, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- Oh I see :D I'm just sick of Ragusino/Michel.de bona and other folks ascribing Slavic names to some " 20th century Yugoslavism", when in fact they have recorded use from the earliest literary period! In pieces that I've read, Romance names occur very rarely. E.g. In Palmotić's Gomnaida:
- Utter nonsense. This post simply confirms my argument: there must be no exceptions from proper procedure or there will be widespread edit-warring. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 17:09, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ivan Bunić Vučić. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120404143036/http://www.posta.hr/main.aspx?id=193&idmarke=43 to http://www.posta.hr/main.aspx?id=193&idmarke=43
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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) 08:15, 6 January 2018 (UTC)