The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. John254 03:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Petar Brzica[edit]

Petar Brzica (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log)

I could not find any neutral references for this text, not for this person. Seems to be some made up propaganda material from Serbo-Croatian wars, and can be mostly found on serbian sites and forums. Most google hits simply redirect to wikipedia or sites that copied the wikipedia article. Rhun 14:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When asked for references to back up an article, especially one dealing with a conflict between two nations who had a war 10 years ago inspired with nationalistic hatred, its not very "neutral" (to satisfy the NPOV requirement) to cite sources from one side which participated in this war (and the surrounding infoamations campaign, and so on). The first, jasenovac-info.com is, i cite, "the holy assembly of bishops of the serbian orthodox church", which I wouldnt call a neutral source. The second one neither, with other articles like "Hague Tribunal: Created to Demonize the Serbs", "Media misinformation about Yugoslavia", "Was the Supposed Srebrenica Massacre a Hoax?" and so on. -- Rhun 17:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The site itself isn't the source, the book it quotes is. And what do you have against the Serbian Orthodox Church? Its leader, Patriarch Paul, kept calling for peace and peaceful solutions to political problems all the way through all the wars.--Hadžija 20:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You cant just cite "some book", without having other books and sources proving the information in this book is correct. I can write and publish a book, but this doesnt make this book worth citing before other sources aknowledge that the information in this book is accurate. And apparently no one, ever, although the place of the genocide is outside Serbia, and freely accessible like the rest of this concentration camp Jasenovac, aknowledged that this person called by this name actually existed. If this were the case, there would be citations of this famous mass butcherer everywhere on the net, and not _only_ on some serbian sites, and on sites which copied the contents of this Wikipedia article. -- Rhun 23:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I did ask for verifability, so a serbian source of an alleged mass-serb-murderer no one else cared to prove wont cut it, since today, 10 years after the war, still a load of propaganda material is roaming the net. Therefore neutral references should be posted. -- Rhun 17:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that there is enough evidence to keep the article. As unsavory as some Serbs have been, that doesn't mean other Serbs can't be victims.--Wehwalt 21:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Serbs being victims by the Ustasa regime in the WW2 era Croatia isnt disputed here at all. But trying to google it, I have not been able to find any other references that prove the existance of this figure than Serbian sites only and sites that copied the text from the Wikipedia article here. I certainly do not think that for an Wikipedia article about a mass murderer and war criminal it is enough to find a citation on some Serbian site and nowhere else? -- Rhun 23:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's quite disgusting that you have to justify yourself to someone in this manner (not an attack on you, on the way things are). Imagine if I said that, "as unsavory as some Jews have been, that doesn't mean other Jews can't be victims." --Hadžija 22:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You really dont care that for something to be included in the wikipedia and then spread to international users as a _proven_ fact to other sites there do not exist any neutral references at all? Even if you know that under the circumstances of the Serbo-Croatian nationalism of the previous 60 years and especially after the recent war there were _insane_ amounts of propaganda material floating around on both sides? Would you still take an unprovable information about a mass murderer who killed 1500 (!) people in a day in a butchering contest(!), whose name only by chance was "Petar Brzica" (Speedy Peter), if this information is provided from only one of the sides in the conflict, and not proven by any international source at all? Well, I would have a problem doing that and then proxying this information through the Wikipedia to other sites on the net as a proven "fact" when it isnt one. -- Rhun 23:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said, the thing about the throat slitting seems to be dubious, but it's not in the article. Accordingly, I voted to delete the Srbosjek here. This guy does seem to have existed, so why delete this article? Finally, please stop lying (no other way to characterise it) that there are no sources when I've linked to them.--Hadžija 00:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My god, you linked a discussion forum as a _proof_ a mass murdering war criminal existed 60 years ago!? Dont you think that by all the effort that has been put into examination of WW2 mass murderings and the holocaust there should be some references besides.... a silly discussion forum, or some dubious blog? I am _NOT_ saying you provided no sources, but I think the ones you provided aer worthless when trying to proove a war crime and an mass murder. This ISNT enough. Are you really serious you cant get anything better than an discussion forum and a "Emperors new clothes" mentioning as a proof of a WW2 warcrime?? -- Rhun 00:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Still ignoring the quote from a book I linked to, then? It seems 99% certain the guy existed. You seem a bit eager to delete this article may I say.--Hadžija 01:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am sorry, i certainly have overseen the two pages linked in the article _after_ my Afd-request from the book "Wanted" by Howard Bloom, which, given Blum's reputation, I would reckognize as an neutral source on this matter. So thanks to User:Laughing Man for providing the links and (unknowingly) clarifying, so I can recall my request for deletion. Greetings, -- Rhun 01:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As a final comment, I am somewhat troubled that editors should say that because a source is of a certain nationality, it is per se unreliable. Propaganda is a weapon used by both sides in war. That a source is Serbian does not make it a lie; that a source is Croatian doesn't make it truthful. It's been said that winners write history; perhaps so, but I would hope WP takes a broader perspective. The fact that the Allies won World War I didn't mean that the anti-German propaganda they put out (raped nuns and so forth) became truthful. We should take a neutral tone, laying out evidence and opposing evidence.--Wehwalt 12:37, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Without third party confirmation you do not have a proof that it _is_ relaiable. I know first hand what amount of propaganda and especially false, totally made up stories have been brought up between the Serbs and the Croats in their mutual desinformation and demonisation campaigns (which is, on a large level still going on, 10 years after their wars), and at the same time, how many war crimes have been tried to get hushed up. I'm hereby removing the Afd text block. -- Rhun 13:32, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
More