Talk:Severin na Kupi

Graves

Hi @Иованъ: this edit needs discussion before being restored - that is a huge volume of detail about non-notable people, and a gallery. See WP:NOT. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:33, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Notability is relative to the subject. For example, the fact Dubravko Osojnički is president of its mjesni odbor (an administrative unit) makes him notable enough for inclusion in the article about Severn na Kupi together with any relevant information (such as political party), but not notable enough for a standalone article devoted to him. In the case of a dying village with a total of about 300 residents ever recorded, there is no reason not to deem all deceased residents notable to the subject. I will relegate non-distinguishing lifespans to the Notes section, but I feel any trimming of the local prosopography would be premature until locally notable residents have been identified and moved to the relevant sections. If their surname is small, the names will be moved to the surname article once it has been created, leaving only a link to the surname. The gallery is already acceptably small but will be redistributed throughout the article as it is expanded. Ivan (talk) 06:06, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Please don't re-add that without consensus for its inclusion.

This is a global encyclopedia, not a local directory. It is not reasonable to assert that all deceased residents are notable, and not appropriate to list all of them. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:01, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

I will remove it for now, but I have to revert your edit to fix the references and retain several locally notable individuals you deleted. Please be more careful. Also, the WP:STATUSQUO is to not revert away from the status quo ante bellum during a dispute discussion; please add one of the inline templates instead. You may be confusing the general guidelines with the guidelines for living people (see WP:NOCONSENSUS). Ivan (talk) 03:02, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Иованъ, the status quo in this case is prior to your insertion of the disputed content. Note that per policy, "responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content", which in this case is yourself. Again, please do not restore this until you have done that. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

WP:ONUS and WP:STATUSQUO are famously contradictory. With only two discussing, it is much better to work differences out the regular, human way than to quote policies at each other. The section is being removed to an extent I trust you will find satisfactory. As a prolific article contributor yourself, I am sure you understand there is a process to writing good ones. But without taking care not to break things, it is difficult to distinguish between a Deletionist and a Vandal. Ivan (talk) 03:39, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

In this case there is no contradiction - both would have your addition omitted. What's more, you've removed the inline template that you yourself proposed above as an alternative to removal of content. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:09, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Then you added it to the top of the page, then I moved it to the relevant section. Now can we get back to editing the article? You have the skill. There are English language sources available. You have library access. Ivan (talk) 05:42, 9 March 2025 (UTC)