Jump to content

Proposals for closing projects/Deletion of Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

This is a proposal for closing and/or deleting a wiki hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation. It is subject to the current closing projects policy.

The proposal is rejected and the project will be kept open.

  • A Language Committee member provided the following comment:
    This proposal has no chance at all obviously. Going after a project one doesn't like with a deletion proposal as the first step is way too exaggerated. Problems in shwiki (if any, such as the alleged copypastes) can be solved locally. --MF-W 09:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Type: 2 (non-routine proposal)
  • Proposed outcome: deletion
  • Proposed action regarding the content: deletion
  • Notice on the project: (Please warn the project.)
  • Informed Group(s): (Which chapters, wiki projects, and other community groups have been informed, if any.)

This wiki should be closed and deleted, according to the Closing projects policy2. Other (often relatively more active) wikis that may be controversial, questionable or in another way uncommon. Serbo-Croatian language is obsolete. Today, we have three wikipedia projects: Serbian (sr.), Croatian (hr.) and Bosniak (bs.). Much of the Serbo-Croatian content consists of copy-paste articles from these three projects. There's nothing useful on this wiki that is different from content of sr. hr. bs. wikis, mostly copy-paste activity of thousands of articles. --Жељко Тодоровић (talk) 19:05, 26 February 2014 (UTC) с. р.[reply]



  1. Oppose, Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia has prosperous future, Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia is a place where harsh nationalistic views from both sides have been and could be neutralized, it is a wikipedia where both sides are heard and could be heard, it is a wikipedia where nationalistic BS is not tolerated. BTW didn't Jimmy Wales said ( on his Meta talk page, September 2013): Croats and Serbs should have one single wikipedia.? Leave Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia alone and alive for people who want to edit it. SadarMoritz, 23:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  2. Oppose --Kolega2357 (talk) 23:58, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose' - although I do consider it being nonsense. Sh.Wiki has, indeed, a prosperous future and is not, as stated earlier, a c/p bin for articled from three ex-Yu Wikipedias. In recent months, there has been a vast increase of both users and original articles that exceed similar ones (or similar topics) on other Wikis both in quality and quantity. There is absolutely no valid reason for the deletion of a project that has brought so much benefit to the fine art of sharing and creating knowledge. This request is ridiculous --Edgar Allan Poe (talk) 00:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose--Soundwaweserb (talk) 00:07, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose--Ivan VA (talk) 00:15, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose :1) Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegrin are standardized varieties of Serbo-Croatian language and not specific languages (for reference see: en:Language secessionism#In Serbo-Croatian, en:Serbo-Croatian, en:Serbian language, en:Croatian language, en:Bosnian language, en:Montenegrin language).
    2) This sources claim that Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia hawe lower nationalistic biases and it gives editors more freedom in their writing style by accepting all local varieties of Serbo-Croatian language (I would say by that they expand space for different perspectives):
    a)Neutral or National Point of View? A Comparison of Srebrenica articles across Wikipedia's language versions (...the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia generally was meant to be liberal and antinationalist in outlook. (page 3)/ Indeed, the discussion behind the language versions themselves shows dissensus among article editors and throws into stark relief the call for separate Serbian, Bosnian and Croatian Wikipedias, as opposed to a single Serbo-Croatian one, as we detail below. (page 5)/..............)
    b)Nezavisna Wikipedija hrvatska(Vjerojatni uzrok lošoj kvaliteti kako hrvatske tako i srpske Wikipedije (možda je srpskohrvatska Wikipedija ipak nešto bolja?) je činjenica da još premalo ljudi sudjeluje u njihovom uređivanju.)
    c)Literary Festival "Na pola puta": (Najluđe je to što uza hrvatsku, srpsku i bosansku postoji još i srpskohrvatska wikipedija koja doslovce sabire maline i kupine, to jest, kopira kvalitetne članke s preostale tri wikipedije i proširuje tematske cjeline prevodima s engleske wikipedije, dok se osjetljive teme koje se tiču bliske povijesti pažljivo zaobilaze. Srpskohrvatska wikipedija je i najležernija u pogledu jezika i pisma, pa dozvoljava da se piše bilo kojim od tri jezika (sr, hr, bs) i dva pisma, iako preferira latinicu.)
    d)(see also:en:Croatian Wikipedia#2013 controversy)
    3) There is still no Montenegrin version of Wikipedia. Probably because they still did not decided on all new changes they will put in their state version of Serbo-Croatian. However, this is much less important argument.
    4) "Accusation" that Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia takes content from other Wikipedia is absurd and ridiculous. What is controversial in spreading knowledge? Of course, we take good contents from Croatian and Serbian Wikipedia as we take it from English or any other Wikipedia. It is also going in opposite direction and many of articles from SC Wikipedia are transferred to Serbian, Croatian or Bosnian Wikipedia's-but it is positive thing and we should support it.
    5) There were some criticism because of existence of separate projects for one Serbo-Croatian language. OSNIVAČ WIKIPEDIJE GOVORI ZA NEDJELJNI: 'Srbi i Hrvati ne smiju imati odvojene Wikipedije' (english: Wikipedia founder speaks for Nedjeljni: "Serbs and Croats should not have a separate Wikipedia's")--MirkoS18 (talk) 00:12, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose. Both hr and sr wiki are deeply nationalistically biased. Sh wiki is the only one with healthy atmosphere and spirit.--Gorran (talk) 00:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  8. I don't think this request is appropriate at this time. There are larger issues surrounding the wikis of "languages of former Yugoslavia" which are being dealt with elsewhere. This, that and the other (talk) 01:45, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Serbocroatian Wikipedia has its own community. Many articles on ancient Greece, Rome, China or Persia do not exist on sr, hr and bs.wiki. I know 'cause I copied many articles from sh.wiki to sr.wiki. Btw, I wouldn't put an equality sign between sr- and hr- wikipedias. -- Bojan  Talk  02:43, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  10. "Obsolete"? Ridiculous. I oppose. -- Francis Christian (talk) 08:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Oppose - There might be imported articles from other ex-yu wikis, but there are also plenty of original articles, which other (bs, hr and sr) wikis don't seem to mind copying. It happens all the time, I don't see why sh wiki should get all the blame. --Duma (talk) 08:29, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Oppose The only objective wikipedia of these four and the oldest of them all as far as I know. En.wiki and sh.wiki are only one where you can find an objective historical articles with no nationalist bias about all Yugoslavian wars in last century and unfortunately there were too many of those.--DobarSkroz (talk) 08:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Oppose, --Pavlemocilac (talk) 09:23, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


PiRSquared17 Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia is not controversy. Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia contains the most objective articles about World War II and the general history. --Kolega2357 (talk) 00:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The comment below was added after the closure of the proposal. --MF-W 13:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]